A name testing questionnaire you can adapt

Start with a clear brief

We are naming an everyday fragrance-free facial moisturizer. Compare Daily Ritual, Soft Form and Bare Theory using the same description for each. Explore name preference and perceived fit among U.S. adults who use facial moisturizer at least weekly. The decision is which names to investigate further, not which name is legally available.

Questions you can adapt

Download this questionnaire (editable Markdown). The download contains the same questions and answer options shown below.

1. Which name is most appealing for this moisturizer?

   Single choice · Daily Ritual; Soft Form; Bare Theory; None of these

   Put the main decision first. A none-of-these option lets the shortlist fail rather than forcing an apparent winner.

2. Which name best fits an everyday fragrance-free facial moisturizer?

   Single choice · Daily Ritual; Soft Form; Bare Theory; None of these

   Fit and liking are different. A name can sound attractive without communicating the intended product.

3. Which name sounds most distinctive from other facial moisturizers?

   Single choice · Daily Ritual; Soft Form; Bare Theory; None of these

   Measures perceived distinctiveness in this context. It does not establish that the name is unused.

4. Which name makes the product seem easiest to approach for everyday use?

   Single choice · Daily Ritual; Soft Form; Bare Theory; No difference between these names

   Tests one intended association without describing a candidate as the accessible choice beforehand.

5. Which name makes the product seem most premium?

   Single choice · Daily Ritual; Soft Form; Bare Theory; No difference between these names

   Premium perception can conflict with an everyday positioning. Decide whether that association helps your offer before examining results.

6. Rank the three names from most to least preferred.

   Ranking · Daily Ritual; Soft Form; Bare Theory

   Ranking gives an order but forces distinctions. Compare it with the first-choice question rather than assuming both must have the same leader.

7. How well do these names, taken as a shortlist, fit the product description?

   Five-point rating · Very poorly; Somewhat poorly; Neither poorly nor well; Somewhat well; Very well

   This is an assessment of the shortlist as a whole. It is not a separate fit score for every name.

Choose how the questions will be answered

The questionnaire is a starting point; its wording does not determine where responses come from. InstaSights generates simulated consumer responses. A survey sent to recruited participants collects human responses. Select the method according to the evidence your decision requires, and keep the response source visible when sharing results.

For the simulated workflow, review the naming-study steps and assemble your research brief. If you need answers collected from people, the PickFu comparison and Conjointly comparison describe alternative workflows and link to their primary documentation.

Design the naming comparison before choosing questions

Start with a shortlist you could realistically use, then decide what the name needs to accomplish. For a fictional pantry snack, imagine comparing Field Pocket, Daily Crunch and Grain Path. If the decision is which two names to show on prototype packaging, the primary measure might be category fit, with appeal as a supporting measure. That is different from asking which name sounds most premium.

Show the same snack description with every name. Decide whether you are testing names alone or complete name-and-tagline combinations. A tagline can explain an otherwise unclear name, but the result then concerns the combination. Record the intended exposure and ask whether the actual study supports the ordering or assignment you need; do not assume randomization simply because there are multiple candidates.

Choose how disagreement will affect the shortlist before seeing results. If one name leads on appeal and another on fit, keep both for a packaging follow-up rather than combining unrelated measures into an unexplained winner score. This planning example has no result data. The moisturizer questionnaire above and the separate oat-latte results example serve different jobs.

Keep everything except the name consistent

Use the exact spelling and capitalization intended for launch. Give each name the same description, price context and amount of explanation. If one option has a tagline and another does not, you are comparing more than names. For a very early shortlist, leave logos out so visual styling does not become another variable.

The seven questions above leave room for up to three additional questions in a standard study. Choose additions because they resolve an uncertainty. Asking the same rating question about each of three names uses three questions, not one. Remove lower-priority questions if you need those separate ratings.

Read preference and positioning together

Begin with the first-choice distribution, including “none.” Then ask whether the preferred name also fits the product and intended associations. A name that seems premium may be wrong for a value-led offer. If the preference and ranking questions disagree, inspect both wordings and the response distributions; do not conceal the question that tells a less convenient story.

Our oat-latte naming example shows a different shortlist and simulated dataset. It is useful for learning to read results, but it is not the result of the moisturizer questions on this page. See how to interpret a close naming result.

Decide what happens after the study

Write a decision rule before you run the questionnaire. For example: keep more than one name if preferences are close, and investigate any conflict between appeal and fit. Record which audience comparisons matter before seeing them. A small subgroup lead is a reason to investigate, not automatic evidence of a different market strategy.

Preference research is separate from domain availability, linguistic review and trademark clearance. It also cannot establish future sales. Use the findings to plan the next checks with your intended customers.

Before you run the study

Check every question and option against your decision. These are editable starting points, not validated instruments. A standard InstaSights study supports up to ten questions; repetitions for alternatives count separately. Confirm the proposed audience and available comparisons in the app. Individual open-ended comments are not included. Simulated responses do not establish what real customers will do.