X-Message-Number: 4421 From: (David Stodolsky) Subject: re: recruitment Date: Fri, 19 May 95 20:48:56 +0200 (CET DST) >what's to lose? But it's not the logical that rules--it's the psychological, >and psychology is not an exact science (or even a "fuzzy" science). Beg to differ. At least some parts of psychology are exact science. Marketing, which can be considered an applied psychological science, has been used for years to sell every product imaginable. I have no doubt, that an appropriate research design could tell us exactly what makes people sign up for cryonics, subject to the limitation of the current small numbers (however, even this potential limitation could be overcome by an intensive and highly instrumented marketing campaign). The major problem in cryonics, with respect to this, is that people, instead of using well accepted and proven methods, have tried to reinvent psychology and marketing. I am thinking here of the "meme" idea and other ad hoc theorizing, such as that demonstrated in the above article. The most basic questions are yet to be even asked. Is the current growth in sign ups sufficient, that is, would a greater rate of growth overload the capabilities of current organizations to respond, causing an organizational breakdown? What is being sold? (if intangible, then "social marketing" is required, so that a tangible element can be introduced to the potential customer.) Will people "buy" the product, or must it be "sold", like life insurance? Is this problem even amenable to marketing, or is (religious) conversion really what is required? What organizations are competing for "market share"? Without some evaluation of these questions, any attempts at determining what will be a successful strategy, in promoting cryonics, will yield no useful data. dss David S. Stodolsky, PhD, Euromath Center, University of Copenhagen Universitetsparken 5, DK-2100 Copenhagen, Denmark. Tel.: +45 38 33 03 30. Fax: +45 38 33 88 80. (C) Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=4421