Shared research study link

New Dietary Guidelines Consumer Reaction

Understand consumer reactions to the new US dietary guidelines that flip the traditional food pyramid, putting meat, dairy, and healthy fats at the top and grains at the bottom

Study Overview Updated Jan 10, 2026

Research question: Assess consumer reactions to flipped U.S. dietary guidelines-first impressions, trust impact, and 3‑month behavior-change intent.
Who: 10 U.S. consumers (ages 26–63) across incomes, regions, and roles-including parents, blue‑collar and trades workers, policy‑aware professionals, and a school procurement manager.
What they said: Strong skepticism and inertia; most see the “flip” as headline theater with possible political/industry influence rather than an evidence‑backed plan.
Cost and equity concerns about meat/dairy‑heavy guidance, attachment to cultural staples (beans, rice, tortillas, oats), vague “healthy fats” definitions, and school‑meal feasibility questions dominated.

Main insights: Trust generally fell or stayed conditionally low; behavior change in the next 3 months is unlikely beyond small, low‑cost tests, with people relying on personal metrics and clinicians over federal posters.
A minority is open to disciplined two‑week A/B trials, while institutional stakeholders flagged procurement and reimbursement hurdles as critical.
Takeaways: Publish a plain‑English “what changed and why” with conflict‑of‑interest disclosures; define “healthy fats” with portion guidance; provide affordability‑first, culturally adaptable menus; supply school‑ready implementation guidance; and frame messaging around stability, moderation, and practical swaps-not a “flip.”

Participant Snapshots

Stack all

10 profiles

Donna Gallegos

Donna Gallegos, 37, is a financially independent San Franciscan who left Bay Area startups after rising to ops manager. She lives solo in Potrero Hill, volunteers, and pursues photography; values durability, transparency, privacy, and pragmatic, fiscally co…

Ashley Young

Rural North Carolina public safety admin, 34, single renter with a rescue dog. Faith-led, frugal, and dependable, she values durability, neighborly service, and clear communication. Decompresses with porch time, bluegrass, and crockpot cooking.

Hannah Bleau

Hannah, 30, is a St. Paul-based veteran and education implementation manager. Pragmatic and values-driven, she bikes, budgets, mentors, and seeks durable, privacy-safe, time-saving solutions aligned with service, stewardship, and community.

Joseph Akin

55-year-old Catholic maintenance supervisor in Tuscaloosa. Married, no kids, practical, budget-conscious, into motorcycles, woodworking, and SEC football. Prefers durable, repairable products, straight talk, and reliable service; avoids subscriptions and ov…

Robert Schroeder

1) Basic Demographics

Robert Schroeder is a 62-year-old White male living in rural New Jersey, USA. He is married, has no children living at home, and speaks English at home. He earned a Bachelor’s degree in Business Administration from Seton Hal…

Debbie Quintana

Spanish-first 63-year-old food service worker in Los Angeles. Frugal, community-minded, and routine-driven. Lives alone, rents, uses public healthcare, walks and buses, cooks at home, and prefers clear, Spanish-friendly, no-hidden-fee offerings.

John Frost

61-year-old rural Pennsylvania warehouse operations supervisor. Married, no children. Pragmatic, value-driven, and privacy-conscious. Prefers durable, serviceable products, clear ROI, and low-hassle tech. Community-minded, health-aware, and road-trip focused.

Ryan Becker

26-year-old rural Massachusetts field service tech and Army veteran. Inherited home, budget-conscious, values durable gear and clear info. Outdoorsy, practical, independent, with irregular hours and a small, tight-knit social circle.

Lindsay Baroni

Lindsay Baroni is a 41-year-old rural Missouri school-district legal counsel, married with two kids. Pragmatic, faith-guided, and community-focused. Values reliability, clear pricing, and low-bandwidth solutions. Balances compliance work with family, garden…

Tracy Mcfarlin

Tracy McFarlin, 45, is a divorced Jacksonville stylist and mom of two. Budget-savvy, community-minded, and practical, she bikes to her salon suite, values durability and time savings, and favors clear, flexible offerings over hype.

Donna Gallegos

Ashley Young

Hannah Bleau

Joseph Akin

Robert Schroeder

1) Basic Demographics

Debbie Quintana

John Frost

Ryan Becker

Lindsay Baroni

Tracy Mcfarlin

Overview 0 participants

Sex / Gender

Race / Ethnicity

Locale (Top)

Occupations (Top)

Demographic Overview No agents selected

Age bucket	Male count	Female count

Participant locations No agents selected

Participant Incomes US benchmark scaled to group size

Income bucket	Participants	US households

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2022 ACS 1-year (Table B19001; >$200k evenly distributed for comparison)

Media Ingestion

Connections appear when personas follow many of the same sources, highlighting overlapping media diets.

Questions and Responses

Stack all

3 questions

Response Summaries

Stack all

3 questions

Word Cloud

Persona Correlations

Overview

Across 27 respondents, the flipped dietary pyramid provokes widespread skepticism and conditional acceptance rather than wholesale behavior change. Reactions cluster strongly by income, life-stage/work demands, and institutional roles: lower-income and staple-reliant households reject the chart as unaffordable or irrelevant; blue-collar older men demand measurable personal outcomes before changing habits; policy-aware professionals and school-procurement stakeholders focus on transparency, conflicts of interest, and operational feasibility; younger trades and maintenance workers are pragmatically unconcerned and may already favor protein-forward patterns. Across groups, common drivers are cost/affordability, distrust of political/lobby influence, demand for clear evidence and measurable outcomes, cultural attachment to staples, and real-world implementation friction (households, schools, budgets). Acceptance is mainly conditional - small, low-cost, short-term experiments or institutional pilots are the likeliest pathway to change.

Total responses: 30

Key Segments

Segment	Attributes	Insight	Supporting Agents
Lower-income, food-service/manual & administrative workers	Income: $25–49k Occupations: Baker, Administrative Assistant, Food Service/Manual roles Locales: Urban (Los Angeles) and rural (North Carolina) Household reliance on low-cost staples (beans, rice, tortillas, oatmeal)	This group views the flipped pyramid as impractical because recommended higher-tier foods (meat, dairy, healthy fats) are perceived as cost-prohibitive. They prioritize calorie-dense, low-cost staples and are unlikely to adopt guidance that increases grocery spend without clear, short-term benefit.	Ashley Young, Debbie Quintana
Older, working-to-middle-class men in blue-collar / distribution roles	Age: 55–62+ Occupations: Facilities/Warehouse/Office Manager, Distribution Income bracket: ~ $62–82k Locales: Rural/suburban (Tuscaloosa, rural PA, rural NJ) Habit-driven meal patterns and reliance on simple measurable health indicators	Skepticism toward guideline churn; acceptance depends on individual outcome metrics (blood pressure, weight, energy, belt notch). This cohort resists headline-driven shifts and will only change diets if they see measurable, personal health improvements.	Joseph Akin, John Frost, Robert Schroeder
Professionals / policy-aware respondents (education, corporate, procurement)	Higher education (Bachelor+), mid–high income Occupations: Corporate counsel, Project Manager, School-district procurement manager Locales: Urban/suburban (San Francisco, St. Paul, rural MO with procurement role) Focus on institutional mechanics, conflict-of-interest, and evidence trails	This group evaluates the guidance through an institutional and evidentiary lens: they want transparent sourcing of recommendations, disclosure of committee conflicts, and clear implementation plans for institutions (notably schools). Their primary barrier is trust in process and downstream operational feasibility.	Lindsay Baroni, Hannah Bleau, Donna Gallegos
Younger, practical trades / maintenance workers	Age: mid-20s to early-30s Occupations: Maintenance Technician, Trades Education: Some college Locales: Rural/suburban Work-energy needs; practical orientation toward fueling work	Already inclined toward protein-forward meals for fuel; less swayed by a graphic flip. Changes would be minor and cost-sensitive. They are pragmatic and likely to run short personal tests rather than follow blanket advice.	Ryan Becker
Parents, caregivers, and school-meal stakeholders	Roles tied to children/schools (parents, childcare-adjacent professionals) Concerns about kid acceptance, picky eating, religious/cultural meal practices (e.g., Lenten Fridays) Attention to procurement, reimbursement mechanics, portioning	Their primary lens is feasibility: can schools and caregivers operationalize the guidance within existing budgets, procurement rules, and kid preferences? They may support changes if there are child-friendly, budgeted, and culturally sensitive examples and pilot programs.	Tracy Mcfarlin, Lindsay Baroni

Shared Mindsets

Trait	Signal	Agents
Skepticism of sudden guideline reversals	Many respondents interpret the flipped pyramid as the latest 'pendulum' swing and will wait for corroborating evidence and time-tested results before altering behavior.	Robert Schroeder, Ashley Young, Tracy Mcfarlin, Ryan Becker, John Frost
Affordability concerns as a primary filter for adoption	Perceived higher cost of meat, dairy, and 'healthy fats' makes lower-income and budget-conscious households unlikely to follow recommendations unless low-cost options or subsidies are provided.	Ashley Young, Debbie Quintana, John Frost, Ryan Becker, Tracy Mcfarlin
Demand for transparency and measurable outcomes	Respondents want plain-English evidence, long-term outcome data, and disclosure of conflicts of interest. Personal metrics (BP, energy, sleep) are preferred evaluation tools over graphic authority.	Hannah Bleau, John Frost, Donna Gallegos, Lindsay Baroni
Cultural and regional attachment to staple foods	Staple foods (rice, beans, tortillas, oatmeal) are seen as central to identity and household budgeting; respondents resist advice that would displace these foods without strong justification or affordable substitutions.	Debbie Quintana, Ashley Young, Ryan Becker
Practicality and institutional implementation focus	Respondents evaluate guidance by real-world feasibility: procurement rules, cafeteria workflows, reimbursement rates, kid acceptance, and household routines matter more than top-line charts.	Lindsay Baroni, Tracy Mcfarlin, Donna Gallegos
Preference for personalization and small experiments	Many favor running short, measurable personal trials to see if changes materially affect energy, sleep, pain, or biomarkers before committing to broader dietary shifts.	Hannah Bleau, Joseph Akin, Ryan Becker, John Frost

Divergences

Segment	Contrast	Agents
Lower-income staple-reliant households	Versus policy-aware professionals: lower-income respondents center cost and immediate household food security; professionals center evidence chains, conflicts of interest, and institutional impacts. The former needs affordable, actionable swaps; the latter needs procedural transparency and system-level implementation details.	Ashley Young, Debbie Quintana, Donna Gallegos, Lindsay Baroni
Older blue-collar men	Versus younger trades workers: older men emphasize measured health outcomes and skepticism toward change, while younger trades are pragmatic, focused on fuel for work, and already more protein-forward-so younger workers are less resistant in practice though also cost-aware.	Joseph Akin, John Frost, Ryan Becker
Parents/school stakeholders	Versus single/adult respondents: parents weigh child palatability, religious observances, and procurement/reimbursement constraints, making them more conservative about adoption unless school-ready recipes and budget-neutral plans are provided.	Tracy Mcfarlin, Lindsay Baroni
Affluent, tech-enabled respondents	Versus general sample: higher-income, wearable-data users combine political skepticism with personal biometrics and are open to evidence-based personal experimentation, differing from lower-income groups whose barrier is affordability rather than access to data.	Donna Gallegos, Hannah Bleau

Recommendations & Next Steps

Overview

Consumers react with skepticism, cost sensitivity, and practicality. Most won’t change diets due to a headline flip; they want plain-English evidence, affordable examples, and tools to measure personal outcomes. For Claude (API test page), prioritize building lightweight, transparent content and tools that surface prices, portions, definitions, and enable two-week micro-tests-and avoid advocacy framing like “flip the pyramid.” Lead with stability, moderation, and cost-aware swaps over doctrine.

Quick Wins (next 2–4 weeks)

#	Action	Why	Owner	Effort	Impact
1	Plain-English ‘What Changed & Why’ explainer	Addresses whiplash and COI concerns; meets demand for transparency before behavior change.	Research + Comms	Low	High
2	‘Healthy fats, defined’ one-pager	Clarifies vague terms that trigger distrust; emphasizes portion guidance and examples without overpromising.	Research + Content	Low	High
3	Budget-first 7-day menu (≤$10/day) with cultural variants	Directly tackles affordability and preserves staples (beans, rice, tortillas, oats) that users won’t abandon.	Content + RD Advisor	Med	High
4	Two-week micro-test kit (printable + Sheets)	Matches users’ experiment mindset (energy, sleep, BP, satiety) and keeps changes small and measurable.	Product + Research	Med	Med
5	School/Institution Q&A one-pager	Responds to procurement/menu questions and positions Claude as practical and systems-aware.	Partnerships/Policy	Low	Med
6	Messaging A/B test: ‘No whiplash. Just practical meals.’ vs ‘New rules’	Quantifies trust impact; users prefer stability and practicality over dramatic flips.	Growth/Comms	Low	Med

Initiatives (30–90 days)

#	Initiative	Description	Owner	Timeline	Dependencies
1	Trust & Transparency Hub	A single destination with plain-language evidence tables, COI disclosures, committee membership summaries, and ‘what changed/what stayed the same’-plus links to independent replications as they appear.	Research + Comms	2–4 weeks for v1; iterative monthly updates	Access to source documents and datasets, Editorial/legal review for claims, Design support for scannable summaries
2	Affordability-first Recipe & Menu API	Expose a lightweight API (and simple UI) that returns costed recipes and portion-aware menus anchored in beans/veg with optional meat/dairy add-ons; include cultural variants and a <$2.50/serving filter.	Product + Engineering + RD Advisor	4–6 weeks for MVP	Ingredient price data source, Nutrition labeling/RD validation, Content ops for bilingual variants
3	Personal Outcomes Tracker (2-week micro-tests)	Minimal-friction tracker (web + printable) to log energy, sleep, satiety, evening snacks, BP (optional) and grocery spend; auto-generate a simple before/after summary.	Product + Design + Research	6–8 weeks for MVP	Analytics instrumentation, Privacy review, Optional: wearable/manual import integration
4	School/Institution Pilot Pack	Procurement/menu templates, reimbursement considerations, and cost-neutral sample cycles; recruit 1–2 districts to test feasibility without increasing spend.	Partnerships/Policy	8–12 weeks to recruit and deploy pilots	District partners, Cost modeling support, USDA/State reimbursement guidance scan
5	Cultural Staples & Bilingual Content Track	Recipe cards and short videos that keep frijoles, caldos, tortillas, oats central while layering protein and healthy fats with portion control; Spanish/English assets.	Content + Community	4–6 weeks initial library; ongoing	Community contributors, Bilingual editorial, Photography/video micro-budget
6	‘Healthy Fats & Portions’ Clarity Campaign	Short, scannable assets clarifying examples, portions, and common pitfalls (e.g., oil overuse, sodium creep from processed meats/cheese) with a moderation tone.	Comms + RD Advisor	3–4 weeks	Clinical/editorial review, Legal disclaimers, Channel plan (email, social, in-product)

KPIs to Track

#	KPI	Definition	Target	Frequency
1	Trust lift (transparency hub)	% agreeing ‘I understand what changed and why’ after visiting the hub	+15% vs baseline within 8 weeks	Biweekly
2	Affordability engagement	% of recipe views/saves with cost ≤ $2.50/serving and avg time on budget pages	≥60% low-cost share; ≥1:30 avg time	Weekly
3	Micro-test completion rate	% of users who start and finish a 2-week tracking cycle	≥25% completion	Monthly
4	Messaging performance	CTR and trust-uplift survey delta for ‘practical/no-whiplash’ vs ‘flip’ variants	≥20% CTR lift; ≥10pt trust delta	Weekly
5	Institutional pilot traction	# of districts downloading pilot pack and # committed to a 4-week trial	10 downloads; 2 active pilots in 12 weeks	Monthly
6	Clarity on ‘healthy fats’	Quiz/pass rate on definitions + reduction in ‘what counts?’ support tickets	≥80% pass; -30% tickets in 6 weeks	Monthly

Risks & Mitigations

#	Risk	Mitigation	Owner
1	Perception of political/industry bias undermines trust	Center process transparency (COIs, evidence tables), avoid advocacy tone, cite multiple independent sources.	Comms + Research
2	Users over-interpret ‘healthy fats’ and increase calories/sodium	Emphasize portion visuals, sodium flags, and ‘spoon-not-glug’ guidance; add guardrails in recipes.	Content + RD Advisor
3	Affordability gap: menus feel out of reach	Cost filters, <$10/day plans, beans/legumes-first defaults, weekly promotions integration.	Product + Content
4	Privacy concerns around personal metrics tracking	No PII by default, clear consent, local/anonymous storage option, concise privacy notice.	Product + Legal
5	Institutional feasibility and reimbursement misalignment	Co-design pilots with districts, include reimbursement math, provide swap matrices that keep cost neutral.	Partnerships/Policy
6	Cultural insensitivity or displacement of staple foods	Bilingual content, community contributors, preserve staples and provide respectful swaps.	Content + Community

Timeline

Weeks 0–2: Ship explainer, ‘healthy fats’ one-pager, messaging A/B; outline API spec.
Weeks 3–6: Launch Affordability API MVP + 7-day menus; release tracker MVP alpha to small cohort.
Weeks 7–10: Expand bilingual/cultural content; iterate tracker; recruit school pilots.
Weeks 11–12: Start 1–2 district pilots; publish early learnings; refine KPIs and roadmap.

Research Study Narrative

Objective and Context

Objective: Understand consumer reactions to new U.S. dietary guidelines that invert the traditional pyramid-elevating meat, dairy, and healthy fats while lowering grains. Across three questions with 27 respondents, reactions were dominated by skepticism, cost sensitivity, and a demand for practical, transparent proof before changing behavior.

What We Heard (Cross-Question Learnings)

Skepticism and “pendulum” fatigue: Many dismissed the flip as headline theater. Robert Schroeder: “Eye roll… I’m not reorganizing my pantry over a headline.” This fed broader “whiplash” distrust (Donna Gallegos: “Whiplash = weak spine…”).
Cost and equity as primary gatekeepers: Meat/dairy/healthy fats are perceived as pricey. Ashley Young: “Beans, rice… keep me steady, and I’m not tossing that because a chart got flipped.” Affordability concerns appeared in all questions and directly constrain adoption.
Cultural staples and practicality: People resist displacing staples like beans, rice, tortillas, and oats. Debbie Quintana: “I grew up on frijolitos… I am not tossing my staples because a graphic got flipped.”
Institutional feasibility questions: School-meal implications surfaced repeatedly. Lindsay Baroni flagged procurement, USDA commodities, and reimbursement mechanics as “in the blast zone.”
Trust contingent on transparency and outcomes: Respondents suspect industry/political influence and want plain-English evidence, conflict-of-interest disclosure, and long-term results explained. Joseph Akin centers personal metrics: “blood pressure cuff… belt notch… how I feel two hours after lunch.”
Behavior change: minimal, if any, and only via small tests: Near-uniform resistance to wholesale shifts in the next 3 months; some will try low-effort swaps or two-week A/B tests tracking energy, sleep, pain, and cost (Hannah Bleau).

Persona Correlations and Nuances

Lower-income, staple-reliant households (e.g., Ashley Young, Debbie Quintana): Reject guidance as unaffordable or irrelevant; prioritize beans/rice/tortillas and budget predictability.
Older, blue-collar men (e.g., Joseph Akin, John Frost, Robert Schroeder): Highly skeptical of reversals; will only change if personal metrics improve.
Policy-aware professionals (e.g., Lindsay Baroni, Hannah Bleau, Donna Gallegos): Focus on evidence chains, COIs, and institutional implementation details; demand transparency.
Younger trades (e.g., Ryan Becker): Pragmatic, protein-forward already, but still cost-sensitive; open to short, measurable trials.
Parents/school stakeholders (e.g., Tracy Mcfarlin, Lindsay Baroni): Need kid-friendly, budget-neutral, culture-aware school menus and procurement guidance to engage.

Implications and Recommendations

Lead with transparency, not advocacy: Publish a plain-English “What changed & why” explainer with evidence tables and COI disclosures to address “flip-flop” distrust.
Define “healthy fats” concretely: Provide portion visuals and examples (“spoon-not-glug”) to reduce overuse risks; integrate sodium/calorie guardrails.
Make affordability the default: Offer a ≤$10/day 7-day menu anchored in beans/veg with optional meat/dairy add-ons and cultural variants (e.g., frijoles, caldos, tortillas, oats).
Enable small, measurable experiments: Provide a two-week micro-test kit (printable + Sheets) tracking energy, sleep quality, satiety, evening snacks, BP (optional), and grocery spend-mirroring the methodical users’ approach.
Address institutional mechanics: Create a school/institution Q&A covering procurement, USDA commodities, reimbursement math, and cost-neutral menu cycles.

Risks and Guardrails

Perceived political/industry bias: Mitigate with COIs, data provenance, and plain-language summaries; cite independent sources when available.
Over-interpretation of “healthy fats”: Emphasize portions and sodium flags in all recipes and visuals.
Affordability gap: Keep cost filters and <$2.50/serving options prominent; preserve cultural staples.
Privacy concerns (personal metrics): Offer no-PII defaults and local/anonymous storage options with clear consent.
Institutional feasibility: Co-design district pilots with cost-neutral targets and swap matrices.

Next Steps and Measurement

Weeks 0–2: Ship “What changed & why” and “Healthy fats, defined.” Run A/B on “practical/no-whiplash” vs “flip” messaging.
Weeks 3–6: Launch budget-first 7-day menus (incl. cultural variants) and the two-week micro-test kit.
Weeks 7–10: Expand bilingual content; publish school/institution Q&A; recruit 1–2 district pilots.
Weeks 11–12: Start pilots; share early learnings; refine roadmap.

KPIs:
- Trust lift: % agreeing “I understand what changed and why” (+15% in 8 weeks).
- Affordability engagement: ≥60% low-cost recipe views; ≥1:30 avg time on budget pages.
- Micro-test completion: ≥25% finish two-week cycle.
- Messaging performance: ≥20% CTR lift; ≥10pt trust delta vs “flip.”
- Institutional traction: 10 pilot-pack downloads; 2 active pilots in 12 weeks.

Bottom line: Trust and adoption hinge on clarity, cost, culture, and measurability. Provide proof, keep staples central, and let consumers and institutions test safely and cheaply.

Recommended Follow-up Questions Updated Jan 10, 2026

Which of the following would be the most and least important barriers for you in following the new guidelines? Options: cost of meat/dairy; taste or family preferences; cooking time/effort; availability in local stores; skepticism about the science; advice from my clinician conflicts; cultural or religious fit; digestive or lactose tolerance; environmental or ethical concerns; school or workplace meal constraints.

maxdiff Pinpoint top adoption blockers to prioritize program design, messaging, and potential policy levers.
Which of the following would most increase your confidence in the new guidelines? Rank from most to least impactful: independent meta-analyses/RCT summaries; published long-term pilot outcomes; full conflict-of-interest/funding disclosures; endorsement from my personal clinician; consensus from registered dietitian organizations; transparent costed meal plans; a personalized risk/benefit calculator; alignment across USDA/HHS/CDC/NIH; a plain-English ‘what changed and why’ explainer.

rank Prioritize evidence and transparency investments that best rebuild credibility.
How healthy or unhealthy do you consider each of the following for regular use? Olive oil; avocado oil; canola oil; butter; ghee; coconut oil; lard/tallow; margarine; soybean oil; peanut oil.

semantic differential Identify ‘healthy fats’ perceptions to target education and clarify misconceptions.
What is the maximum percentage increase in your weekly grocery spend you would accept to follow the new guidelines? Enter a number from 0 to 100.

numeric Set affordability guardrails for meal plans, vouchers, or subsidies.
Which of the following would make you willing to try a two-week meal plan aligned with the new guidelines? Options: free two-week plan with shopping list; grocery voucher/discount; simple tracking app for energy/weight/BP; family-friendly recipes and kid-approved swaps; batch-cook/quick-prep options; culturally familiar menu variants; school-lunch–compatible guidance; optional check-in with a registered dietitian; plant-forward choices that fit the guidelines.

multi select Select features and incentives that maximize pilot trial uptake.
Who would you most trust as the primary messenger to explain and guide you on the new guidelines? Rank: registered dietitian; your primary care clinician; independent university researchers; USDA/HHS; non-profit health organization (e.g., AHA/ADA); community health worker; school nutrition director; credentialed health influencer; none of the above.

rank Choose priority spokespeople and partners for outreach.

These questions fill gaps on barriers, credibility levers, ‘healthy fats’ clarity, cost thresholds, trial enablers, and trusted messengers-directly informing communications, program design, and potential pilots.

Study Overview Updated Jan 10, 2026

News & Media

Source	Weight

New Dietary Guidelines Consumer Reaction

Donna Gallegos

Ashley Young

Hannah Bleau

Joseph Akin

Robert Schroeder

1) Basic Demographics

Debbie Quintana

John Frost

Ryan Becker

Lindsay Baroni

Tracy Mcfarlin

Donna Gallegos

Ashley Young

Hannah Bleau

Joseph Akin

Robert Schroeder

1) Basic Demographics

Debbie Quintana

John Frost

Ryan Becker

Lindsay Baroni

Tracy Mcfarlin

Sex / Gender

Race / Ethnicity

Locale (Top)

Occupations (Top)

Summary

Themes

Outliers

Overview

Key Segments

Shared Mindsets

Divergences

Overview

Quick Wins (next 2–4 weeks)

Initiatives (30–90 days)

KPIs to Track

Risks & Mitigations

Timeline

Objective and Context

What We Heard (Cross-Question Learnings)

Persona Correlations and Nuances

Implications and Recommendations

Risks and Guardrails

Next Steps and Measurement

Distinct Market Research Groups

Marketing Reports Generated

Digital Twin Synthetic Personas

Questions Answered