Shared research study link
Moon Juice Adaptogens Consumer Study
Understand US wellness consumers' perceptions of adaptogenic supplements
Study Overview
Updated Jan 27, 2026
Research question: Understand US wellness consumers’ perceptions of adaptogenic supplements, what would justify a $30–50 daily price, and how they assess brand credibility.
Research group: Six US adults (ages 26–45) across sales, operations, product, and culinary roles in mixed rural/urban locales, including bilingual Hispanic participants; 18 total responses across three prompts.
What they said: Adaptogens read as an Instagram-forward buzzword with low baseline trust, mixed-to-negative trials (grogginess, bad taste), and frustration with high prices, proprietary blends, subscriptions, and vague claims.
Premium spend is conditional on fast, felt results within 1–4 weeks, exact single-ingredient dosing with third-party batch testing, simple once-daily routines, fair per‑serving pricing/returns, and proof from peers or clinicians.
Main insights: clear, verifiable information and operational reliability-not branding-drive trust and willingness to pay, with segment nuances around bilingual access, climate‑proof packaging, pharmacist validation, and cost‑per‑serving math.
Research group: Six US adults (ages 26–45) across sales, operations, product, and culinary roles in mixed rural/urban locales, including bilingual Hispanic participants; 18 total responses across three prompts.
What they said: Adaptogens read as an Instagram-forward buzzword with low baseline trust, mixed-to-negative trials (grogginess, bad taste), and frustration with high prices, proprietary blends, subscriptions, and vague claims.
Premium spend is conditional on fast, felt results within 1–4 weeks, exact single-ingredient dosing with third-party batch testing, simple once-daily routines, fair per‑serving pricing/returns, and proof from peers or clinicians.
Main insights: clear, verifiable information and operational reliability-not branding-drive trust and willingness to pay, with segment nuances around bilingual access, climate‑proof packaging, pharmacist validation, and cost‑per‑serving math.
- Adopt radical transparency: exact mg dosing and standardized extracts, no proprietary blends, batch COAs via QR, visible cGMP/USP/NSF, with high‑quality Spanish parity.
- Launch a problem‑first hero SKU with a felt‑results window (1–4 weeks), a sub‑$10 7–10 day sample and 30‑day money‑back, and plain claims tied to human data.
- Simplify and de‑risk the experience: 1–2 capsules or a neutral scoop with good tolerability, travel packs and climate‑stable packaging, clear per‑serving math with no auto‑ship traps and easy returns, plus relatable peer/clinician proof and responsive phone/text/WhatsApp support.
Participant Snapshots
6 profiles
Dana Perez
1) Basic Demographics
Dana Perez is a 33-year-old White (Non-Hispanic) woman living in urban Greensboro, North Carolina. She’s a U.S. citizen, agnostic, and leans Republican—more fiscally conservative and pragmatically moderate on social issues.…
Christopher Espana
Christopher Espana, 45, Fort Worth-based inside sales/order-desk worker in HVAC/plumbing distribution. Shared custody of his 11-year-old son. Earns under $25k; budget-frugal, values reliability and time savings, prefers prepaid plans. Scoots/carpools, meal-…
Leah Nunez
Bilingual sales manager, 38, married with three kids in Carson City, CA. High household income, faith-driven, pragmatic, time-pressed. Values transparency, reliability, and Spanish-friendly service. Leads in auto retail, budgets carefully, and centers family.
Abigail Yates
Abigail, 26, is a rural Florida BBQ pro with a hardworking, community-first streak. Married, no kids, she balances food truck hustle and a storm-season business household. Practical, warm, and value-driven, she prefers durable, no-nonsense solutions.
Diego Cobb
Diego Cobb, 33, is a pragmatic dental-operations leader in rural Minnesota. Married with three kids, he values reliability, community, and time-saving tools. Outdoorsy, tech-savvy, and budget-aware, he prefers plainspoken solutions with clear ROI.
Celina Wolfe
37-year-old single caregiver in Fayetteville, Arkansas. Lives with her mother, relies on predictable, budget-friendly solutions. Pragmatic, faith-guided, and routine-driven. Chooses reliability and low complexity; values community support, clear pricing, an…
Dana Perez
1) Basic Demographics
Dana Perez is a 33-year-old White (Non-Hispanic) woman living in urban Greensboro, North Carolina. She’s a U.S. citizen, agnostic, and leans Republican—more fiscally conservative and pragmatically moderate on social issues.…
Christopher Espana
Christopher Espana, 45, Fort Worth-based inside sales/order-desk worker in HVAC/plumbing distribution. Shared custody of his 11-year-old son. Earns under $25k; budget-frugal, values reliability and time savings, prefers prepaid plans. Scoots/carpools, meal-…
Leah Nunez
Bilingual sales manager, 38, married with three kids in Carson City, CA. High household income, faith-driven, pragmatic, time-pressed. Values transparency, reliability, and Spanish-friendly service. Leads in auto retail, budgets carefully, and centers family.
Abigail Yates
Abigail, 26, is a rural Florida BBQ pro with a hardworking, community-first streak. Married, no kids, she balances food truck hustle and a storm-season business household. Practical, warm, and value-driven, she prefers durable, no-nonsense solutions.
Diego Cobb
Diego Cobb, 33, is a pragmatic dental-operations leader in rural Minnesota. Married with three kids, he values reliability, community, and time-saving tools. Outdoorsy, tech-savvy, and budget-aware, he prefers plainspoken solutions with clear ROI.
Celina Wolfe
37-year-old single caregiver in Fayetteville, Arkansas. Lives with her mother, relies on predictable, budget-friendly solutions. Pragmatic, faith-guided, and routine-driven. Chooses reliability and low complexity; values community support, clear pricing, an…
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
3 questions
Response Summaries
3 questions
Word Cloud
Question Summary
Preparing summary…
Summary
Themes
| Theme | Count | Example Participant | Example Quote |
|---|
Outliers
| Agent | Snippet | Reason |
|---|
Analyzing correlations…
Generating correlations…
Taking longer than usual
Persona Correlations
Analyzing correlations…
Overview
Respondents across this US wellness-consumer sample view adaptogens as a marketing-forward category and are broadly skeptical. That skepticism converges on a few clear purchase levers: transparent ingredient and testing information, demonstrable short-term outcomes, simple low-friction formats, and fair/clear pricing and return policies. How those levers are prioritized varies systematically by income/occupation, language/culture, age and local logistics: higher-income professionals demand clinical clarity and measurable metrics; lower-income frontline workers and caregivers prioritize price-per-serving, retail accessibility and reassurance about safety with medications; Hispanic/Spanish-speaking consumers require bilingual materials and culturally aligned trust signals; rural and climate-exposed respondents treat packaging and shipping stability as credibility factors. A brand that offers a short, low-cost trial demonstrating one measurable benefit, with full dosing/test transparency, neutral taste/simple dosing, and non-predatory purchase flows will convert a large share of skeptics across segments.
Total responses: 18
Key Segments
| Segment | Attributes | Insight | Supporting Agents |
|---|---|---|---|
| Higher-income professionals (tech/ops/sales managers) |
|
These consumers treat adaptogens like a technical product: they require batch COAs, precise mg dosing, peer-reviewed or clinical evidence and measurable signal within a short trial window (sleep score, HRV). They will pay premium only if a clear, quantifiable outcome is demonstrable quickly. | Dana Perez, Diego Cobb, Leah Nunez |
| Lower-income frontline workers & caregivers |
|
Price-for-value dominates: clear per-serving cost, trials under ~$10, visible retail availability and easy returns matter more than clinical papers. Safety with existing meds and pharmacist/doctor reassurance are critical purchase checks. | Christopher Espana, Celina Wolfe, Abigail Yates |
| Hispanic / Spanish-speaking consumers |
|
Bilingual packaging, Spanish-language FAQs/customer support and culturally resonant testimonials (family, church, neighbors) materially increase trust. Sloppy translation is read as an overall quality signal; well-executed Spanish bolsters credibility. | Leah Nunez, Dana Perez |
| Rural & climate-extreme locales |
|
Logistics and physical packaging are trust signals: consumers expect formulations and packaging that survive temperature extremes, reliable shipping, and clear return/pickup options. Product stability (no melting/clumping) influences perceived product quality. | Diego Cobb, Abigail Yates, Celina Wolfe |
| Younger, social-media-aware consumers (20s–30s) |
|
This cohort rejects influencer-driven hype and 'pretty jar' aesthetics. They respond to unvarnished user reviews, prefer low-cost samples and resist subscription traps-authenticity and trialability are the strongest conversion levers. | Abigail Yates, Dana Perez, Diego Cobb |
| Occupation-driven practical users |
|
Occupation shapes functional priorities: chefs emphasize taste/texture and heat stability; physically active workers want simple, portable dosing and clear cost/day math; caregivers focus on safety and drug interactions and often consult pharmacists/doctors before trying. | Abigail Yates, Christopher Espana, Celina Wolfe |
| Cross-cutting simplicity seekers |
|
Across demographics, low-friction regimens, plain-label ingredients, no proprietary blends and transparent returns/pricing are universal purchase enablers. Subscription dark patterns are broadly rejected. | Christopher Espana, Dana Perez, Diego Cobb, Abigail Yates, Celina Wolfe, Leah Nunez |
Shared Mindsets
| Trait | Signal | Agents |
|---|---|---|
| Skepticism of marketing-forward claims | Many respondents default to 'buzzword' framing; grandiose benefits without specific, verifiable evidence are treated with suspicion. | Christopher Espana, Dana Perez, Diego Cobb, Abigail Yates, Celina Wolfe, Leah Nunez |
| Demand for transparency | Exact mg dosing, no proprietary blends and batch-level COAs or traceable sourcing are repeatedly requested as baseline credibility requirements. | Dana Perez, Diego Cobb, Christopher Espana, Leah Nunez, Abigail Yates |
| Need for measurable outcomes | Buy-in hinges on observable short-term signals (sleep quality, fewer afternoon crashes, HRV) within a 1–4 week trial window rather than abstract long-term claims. | Diego Cobb, Dana Perez, Christopher Espana, Abigail Yates, Celina Wolfe |
| Price / value sensitivity | Consumers routinely compare supplement spend to essentials and expect clear per-serving math, trials or sample options, and reasonable return policies. | Christopher Espana, Celina Wolfe, Abigail Yates, Leah Nunez |
| Aversion to subscription/dark-patterns | Auto-ship, bait-and-switch intro pricing and hard-to-cancel subscriptions are cited as immediate disqualifiers for many respondents. | Dana Perez, Christopher Espana, Celina Wolfe, Leah Nunez, Abigail Yates |
Divergences
| Segment | Contrast | Agents |
|---|---|---|
| Evidence vs cost trade-off | Higher-income professionals prioritize clinical evidence and measurable outcomes and will pay premium for validated efficacy; lower-income frontline/caregivers place greater weight on immediate price-for-value, retail access and safety assurances than on clinical papers. | Dana Perez, Diego Cobb, Leah Nunez, Christopher Espana, Celina Wolfe, Abigail Yates |
| Language & cultural trust signals | Hispanic / Spanish-speaking respondents require bilingual, culturally resonant communications to convert, while non-Hispanic respondents evaluate messaging primarily on evidence and transparency. | Leah Nunez, Dana Perez |
| Physical logistics vs aesthetic marketing | Rural and climate-exposed consumers judge packaging and shipping resilience as a proof point of quality, whereas urban/suburban consumers focus more on clinical claims and brand reputation. | Diego Cobb, Abigail Yates, Celina Wolfe, Dana Perez |
| Authenticity vs influencer polish | Younger, social-media-aware users prefer authentic peer testimonials and sampling over polished influencer campaigns that older or more brand-trusting consumers might accept. | Abigail Yates, Dana Perez, Diego Cobb |
Creating recommendations…
Generating recommendations…
Taking longer than usual
Recommendations & Next Steps
Preparing recommendations…
Overview
US wellness consumers view adaptogens as a marketing buzzword with low baseline trust. Premium purchase happens only when products deliver clear, fast, measurable benefit (1–4 weeks), show exact dosing and batch-level COAs, avoid proprietary blends, and fit a low-friction routine (1–2 capsules or a neutral scoop). Value is scrutinized via cost-per-serving, with strong aversion to subscriptions and opaque pricing. Operational details-taste/tolerability, heat/cold-stable packaging, reliable shipping, and bilingual support-directly influence trust and repeat purchase. Action plan: launch a problem-first hero SKU with radical transparency, a <$10 trial path and no auto-ship by default, backed by QR-accessible COAs and relatable user proof.
Quick Wins (next 2–4 weeks)
| # | Action | Why | Owner | Effort | Impact |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Replace proprietary blends with full mg disclosure on PDPs | Addresses top trust blocker-consumers demand exact doses to compare against human data. | Regulatory/QA Lead + Product | Low | High |
| 2 | Publish batch COAs with QR stickers on existing inventory | Immediate third-party proof lowers perceived risk and supports premium pricing. | Regulatory/QA Lead + Engineering (web) | Med | High |
| 3 | Launch $7 10-day sample + 30-day money-back, no auto-ship default | Enables try-small behavior and reduces churn from unmet expectations. | Growth + CX | Low | High |
| 4 | Add Spanish FAQs + WhatsApp/SMS support | Bilingual access strongly boosts credibility for Hispanic consumers; poor translation is a red flag. | Localization Lead + CX | Low | Med |
| 5 | Cost-per-serving calculator on PDPs | Matches consumers’ economic framing and clarifies replacement value (e.g., replaces 2–3 products). | Growth PM + Design/Engineering | Low | Med |
| 6 | Sensory fast-fix: remove stevia; offer capsule option and travel sachets | Taste/GI complaints drive early abandonment; portable formats fit daily routines. | Product + Supply Chain | Med | High |
Initiatives (30–90 days)
| # | Initiative | Description | Owner | Timeline | Dependencies |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Radical Transparency & Quality Program | Implement end-to-end transparency: exact dosing (no blends), batch-level COAs via QR, cGMP documentation, ISO 17025 lab partners, labeled contraindications, and a public claims register with conservative language. | Regulatory/QA Lead + Engineering | MVP in 45 days; full rollout by Day 90 | Third-party lab contracts, QR/COA portal build, Claims/legal review |
| 2 | Problem-First Hero SKU | Prioritize one clear outcome (e.g., sleep quality or stress reduction) with a single- or few-ingredient formula at evidence-aligned doses, 1x daily format, neutral taste, and a 14–30 day felt-results guarantee. | Product Lead (Supplements) | Formulate/validate by Day 45; pilot batch by Day 75; public launch Day 90 | Supplier qualification, Stability/sensory testing, Regulatory label review |
| 3 | Trial-to-Conversion Engine | Design a <$10 7–10 day sample, no auto-ship checkout, easy returns, and lifecycle comms that guide a 14–30 day N-of-1 test. Include a cost-per-serving UI and replacement-value messaging. | Growth + CX | Design in 30 days; launch by Day 60; optimize through Day 90 | Finance for pricing/margins, Legal for returns policy, Eng for checkout/analytics |
| 4 | Sensory & Packaging Reliability | Eliminate off-notes (e.g., stevia aftertaste), add capsule option, create travel packs, and validate heat/cold stability via accelerated testing. Shift to refill pouches to reduce waste and shipping volume. | Ops/Supply Chain + Product | Bench tests by Day 30; stability by Day 60; packaging live by Day 90 | Co-manufacturer packaging options, Stability lab time, QA sign-off |
| 5 | Bilingual Trust & Access | Deliver high-quality Spanish for labels, PDPs, COAs, and support scripts. Add Saturday hours and WhatsApp channel. Community validators (church groups, local pharmacists) for social proof. | Localization Lead + CX | Core assets in 30 days; full coverage by Day 60 | Pro translation + back-translation, COA translation workflow, CX staffing |
| 6 | Real-World Proof Campaign | Recruit peer testimonials (shift workers, parents) with simple trackers (sleep score, afternoon energy). Publish mixed, detailed reviews and pharmacist one-pagers; avoid influencer polish. | Marketing + Research | Recruit by Day 30; first case studies Day 60; rolling releases to Day 90 | Legal/compliance review, UGC consent + incentives, Analytics for outcome tracking |
KPIs to Track
| # | KPI | Definition | Target | Frequency |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Sample-to-Full Conversion | Percent of sample purchasers who buy a full-size within 21 days | ≥ 30% | Weekly |
| 2 | COA QR Engagement | Unique QR scans per 100 orders (by lot) | ≥ 30 scans/100 orders | Weekly |
| 3 | Refund/Return Rate (30D) | Percent of orders refunded/returned within 30 days | ≤ 8% | Weekly |
| 4 | Repeat Purchase (60D) | Percent of first-time customers who reorder within 60 days | ≥ 35% | Monthly |
| 5 | CX Responsiveness & CSAT | First response time and satisfaction for email/SMS/WhatsApp | < 1 hr FRT; ≥ 4.5/5 CSAT | Weekly |
| 6 | Sensory/Side-Effect Complaints | Taste/GI/jitters complaints per 100 orders | ≤ 3/100 | Weekly |
Risks & Mitigations
| # | Risk | Mitigation | Owner |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Regulatory/claims exposure from adaptogen marketing | Conservative, specific claims tied to human data; legal review; contraindications on PDP/label; internal claims register | Regulatory/QA Lead |
| 2 | COA/lab bottlenecks increase cost and delay launches | Dual-source ISO 17025 labs, SLA contracts, staggered lots, buffer lead times; cache COAs in portal | Regulatory/QA Lead |
| 3 | Poor sensory/tolerability drives early churn | Blinded taste tests (n≥30), remove stevia, capsule fallback, early-life CX outreach with swap options | Product Lead + CX |
| 4 | Heat/cold instability during shipping | Accelerated stability testing, packaging upgrades (desiccants/liners), climate notes on label, QC spot checks by region | Ops/Supply Chain |
| 5 | Translation errors erode trust with Spanish-speaking customers | Pro translation + back-translation, in-market review panel, QA checklist for each release | Localization Lead |
| 6 | Trial refunds and COA costs compress margin | Tight COGS on samples, conversion-focused flows, bundle hero SKU, price engineering with refill pouches | Finance + Growth |
Timeline
0–30 days: Transparency MVP (PDP dose clarity, QR-COA portal), sample + refund policy, Spanish FAQs/support, cost-per-serving UI, sensory quick fixes.
31–60 days: Pilot hero SKU, first batch COAs, stability results, travel packs/refill pouches, launch trial-to-conversion flows, recruit UGC/real-world proof.
61–90 days: Scale transparency program, publish case studies, expand bilingual coverage, retail/CX returns enablement, iterate on formula/packaging from KPI readouts.
31–60 days: Pilot hero SKU, first batch COAs, stability results, travel packs/refill pouches, launch trial-to-conversion flows, recruit UGC/real-world proof.
61–90 days: Scale transparency program, publish case studies, expand bilingual coverage, retail/CX returns enablement, iterate on formula/packaging from KPI readouts.
Research Study Narrative
Objective and Context
Moon Juice Adaptogens Consumer Study set out to understand US wellness consumers’ perceptions of adaptogenic supplements and the conditions under which they would trust and pay a premium for them. Across six in-depth responses, a clear pattern emerged: low baseline trust, strong demand for clinical-style transparency, and willingness to pay only when fast, felt outcomes and frictionless routines are delivered.
What We Heard (Cross-Question Learnings)
- Skepticism and “buzzword” fatigue: Adaptogens are widely seen as marketing-first. Christopher Espana: “I don’t really trust it by default… If I can’t explain in plain words what it does, I skip it.” Leah Nunez: “Instagram in a jar… $28 price tag for dust that promises calm-focus-clarity-all-in-one.”
- Negative or ambiguous experiences: Reports of grogginess, fog, and bad taste (e.g., Abigail Yates: “Ashwagandha gummies made me nap… Mushroom coffee tasted like wet mulch and did a whole lotta nothing.”).
- Radical transparency is non-negotiable: Exact mg dosing, no proprietary blends, and batch-level COAs. Dana Perez: “Clinical clarity… Independent testing per lot-QR code to a real certificate.” Diego Cobb seeks USP/NSF-type verification.
- Premium only for fast, measurable benefit: People want to “feel it” in 1–4 weeks. Christopher: “Felt results in 10–14 days… If I don’t feel it, I’m out.”
- Low-friction routine fit: Simple, once-daily dosing that fits pill organizers (Celina Wolfe), neutral taste/no GI issues (Diego), and reliable, heat-proof packaging (Abigail).
- Value scrutiny and anti-traps: Clear cost-per-serving and easy returns; strong aversion to opaque pricing and subscription traps. Celina: “If I can’t take it back, no.”
- Credibility signals: cGMP/NSF/USP, lot numbers, expiry dates, sealed packaging, modest evidence-linked claims; accessible contact info and human support channels.
Persona Correlations and Nuances
- Higher-income professionals: Demand batch COAs, precise dosing, and quantifiable outcomes (sleep score/HRV). Will pay if benefits are felt quickly (Dana, Diego, Leah).
- Frontline workers and caregivers: Price-per-serving, retail access, easy returns, and medication safety checks dominate (Christopher, Celina, Abigail).
- Hispanic/Spanish-speaking: Require high-quality bilingual labels/support; poor translation erodes trust (Leah, Dana).
- Rural/climate-exposed: Packaging durability and shipping stability are credibility factors (Diego, Abigail, Celina).
- Younger/social-aware: Prefer authentic peer proof and low-cost trials over influencer polish (Abigail, Dana, Diego).
Implications and Recommendations
- Launch a problem-first hero SKU targeting one clear outcome (e.g., sleep quality or stress), using a few evidence-aligned ingredients, 1x daily dosing, neutral taste, and a 14–30 day felt-results guarantee (aligns with Christopher’s 10–14 day bar).
- Radical transparency program: Full mg disclosure (no blends), lot-level COAs via QR, cGMP/NSF/USP visibility, and conservative claims linked to human data (addresses Dana/Diego credibility criteria).
- Trial-to-conversion path: <$10 7–10 day sample, no auto-ship by default, easy 30-day refunds, and guidance for N-of-1 tracking (meets try-small behavior and anti-trap sentiment).
- Operational excellence: Capsule option, remove stevia aftertaste, travel packs, and validated heat/cold stability (Abigail/Diego sensory and logistics requirements).
- Bilingual trust and access: Professionally translated Spanish labels/FAQs/COAs plus WhatsApp/SMS and Saturday support (Leah/Dana).
- Real-world proof and value framing: Testimonials from relatable segments (parents, shift workers), explicit contraindications, and a cost-per-serving calculator that clarifies replacements (Abigail’s consolidation ask; Christopher’s cost math).
Risks and Guardrails
- Regulatory/claims exposure: Use specific, modest claims tied to human data; maintain an internal claims register and contraindications.
- Lab/COA bottlenecks: Dual-source ISO 17025 labs; SLAs and staggered lots.
- Sensory/tolerability churn: Blinded taste tests, capsule fallback, proactive CX swap options.
- Climate instability in shipping: Accelerated stability testing, desiccants/liners, QC by region.
- Translation errors: Pro translation + back-translation with in-market review.
Next Steps and Measurement
- 0–30 days: Dose clarity on PDPs, QR-COA portal MVP, <$10 sample + 30-day refund (no auto-ship), Spanish FAQs/support, sensory quick fixes, cost-per-serving UI.
- 31–60 days: Pilot hero SKU, publish first batch COAs, travel packs/refill pouches, trial-to-conversion flows, recruit peer UGC.
- 61–90 days: Scale transparency, publish early case studies, expand bilingual coverage, enable easy retail/CX returns, iterate on formula/packaging from readouts.
- KPIs: Sample-to-full conversion ≥30% (21 days); COA QR scans ≥30/100 orders; Refund rate ≤8% (30D); Repeat purchase ≥35% (60D); CX FRT <1 hr and CSAT ≥4.5/5.
Recommended Follow-up Questions
Updated Jan 27, 2026
-
Which outcomes are most important for you to get from an adaptogen supplement? (e.g., stress reduction, sleep quality, focus, steady energy, mood stability, hormonal balance, immune support, digestion/gut comfort, exercise recovery)maxdiff Prioritize claims and roadmap by identifying the top jobs-to-be-done consumers value.
-
How much do you trust each of the following adaptogenic ingredients? (Rows: ashwagandha, rhodiola, panax ginseng, eleuthero, schisandra, holy basil/tulsi, lion’s mane, reishi, cordyceps. Columns: Not familiar, Do not trust, Slightly trust, Moderately trust, Completely trust)matrix Guides formulation and messaging focus by mapping ingredient-specific trust gaps.
-
Which product formats would you prefer for taking adaptogens daily? (capsules, tablets, gummies, powder to mix, ready-to-drink, tincture/drops, functional coffee/tea, chocolate/bar, other)multi select Informs product format and packaging choices to reduce friction and improve adoption.
-
After how many days without a meaningful benefit would you stop using a new adaptogen product?numeric Sets claim timeframes, trial length, and follow-up cadence to minimize early churn.
-
For a daily adaptogen supplement you consider acceptable, what monthly price (USD) would you be willing to pay?numeric Defines price ceiling and target pack sizes for acceptable monthly spend.
-
Rank the following sources by how much they would influence you to try an adaptogen product (1 = most influence): primary care clinician, pharmacist, registered dietitian, close friend/family, online community reviews (e.g., Reddit), verified retailer reviews, influencer/creator, in‑store staff, brand website content, clinical study summary.rank Prioritizes partnerships and channel spend across clinicians, peers, and media.
Randomize lists to reduce order bias. Include an 'Other' option where applicable with open text capture.
Study Overview
Updated Jan 27, 2026
Research question: Understand US wellness consumers’ perceptions of adaptogenic supplements, what would justify a $30–50 daily price, and how they assess brand credibility.
Research group: Six US adults (ages 26–45) across sales, operations, product, and culinary roles in mixed rural/urban locales, including bilingual Hispanic participants; 18 total responses across three prompts.
What they said: Adaptogens read as an Instagram-forward buzzword with low baseline trust, mixed-to-negative trials (grogginess, bad taste), and frustration with high prices, proprietary blends, subscriptions, and vague claims.
Premium spend is conditional on fast, felt results within 1–4 weeks, exact single-ingredient dosing with third-party batch testing, simple once-daily routines, fair per‑serving pricing/returns, and proof from peers or clinicians.
Main insights: clear, verifiable information and operational reliability-not branding-drive trust and willingness to pay, with segment nuances around bilingual access, climate‑proof packaging, pharmacist validation, and cost‑per‑serving math.
Research group: Six US adults (ages 26–45) across sales, operations, product, and culinary roles in mixed rural/urban locales, including bilingual Hispanic participants; 18 total responses across three prompts.
What they said: Adaptogens read as an Instagram-forward buzzword with low baseline trust, mixed-to-negative trials (grogginess, bad taste), and frustration with high prices, proprietary blends, subscriptions, and vague claims.
Premium spend is conditional on fast, felt results within 1–4 weeks, exact single-ingredient dosing with third-party batch testing, simple once-daily routines, fair per‑serving pricing/returns, and proof from peers or clinicians.
Main insights: clear, verifiable information and operational reliability-not branding-drive trust and willingness to pay, with segment nuances around bilingual access, climate‑proof packaging, pharmacist validation, and cost‑per‑serving math.
- Adopt radical transparency: exact mg dosing and standardized extracts, no proprietary blends, batch COAs via QR, visible cGMP/USP/NSF, with high‑quality Spanish parity.
- Launch a problem‑first hero SKU with a felt‑results window (1–4 weeks), a sub‑$10 7–10 day sample and 30‑day money‑back, and plain claims tied to human data.
- Simplify and de‑risk the experience: 1–2 capsules or a neutral scoop with good tolerability, travel packs and climate‑stable packaging, clear per‑serving math with no auto‑ship traps and easy returns, plus relatable peer/clinician proof and responsive phone/text/WhatsApp support.
Awaiting responses…
Usually takes — seconds
Taking longer than usual
Question
0 responses
Waiting…
| Name | Response | Info |
|---|