top of page



April 11 - 13, 2023


Presented at The Greenbrier

White Sulphur Springs, WV


Also live streamed via Zoom

In-person attendance | $2,500*

Virtual attendance | $2,300*

* A 10% discount to each additional registration when registered at the same time, from the same company, and reduced or waived course fees to non-profit entities, students, judges, government employees, and previous 2023 webinar attendees (50%). Continuing Legal Education (CLE) credits will be sought upon request. This program qualifies for Certified Food Scientist contact hours (CH). CFS Certificants may claim 15 CH for their attendance. For more information, please contact us

This course has been developed for sensory and consumer scientists, product developers, market research managers, package/product testing specialists, and attorneys specializing in advertising law.





  • Printed slide manual and NAD Case studies

  • A printed copy of our book, Tools and Applications of Sensory and Consumer Science and PDF downloads of the following 2 books: Readings in Advertising Claims Substantiation, and Thurstonian Models: Categorical Decision Making in the Presence of Noise

  • Food and beverage refreshments each day, plus lunch and dinner on Tuesday and Wednesday.

The instructors for this course will be:


The Institute for Perception


The Institute for Perception

Will Russ.png

The Institute for Perception

Lauren Aronson.png

Crowell & Moring

Annie-Ugurlayan-biopix (1) (1).png

National Advertising Division

Eric Unis.png

National Advertising Division

PIX-Wang.ZhengRGB copy.png

National Advertising Division

Emily Broach.png

Emily Broach

Colgate-Palmolive Company


Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP


TN Attorney General's Office (Retired)

David-Mallen-biopix (1).png

Loeb & Loeb

Advertising Claims Support: Case Histories and Principles
Tuesday, April 11

Advertising Claims Support  |  8am - 9am


  • Introduction and scope of the course

  • Claims support in product/brand development

  • Admissibility of expert testimony

  • Surveys in false advertising and trademark cases

  • Efficacy, perception, and materiality

Claims and False Advertising; Internal Counsel Perspective  |  9:10am - 10am


  • Three ways an ad can be false

  • A typical false advertising lawsuit

  • Puffery, falsity, and injury: The Procter & Gamble Co. vs. Kimberly-Clark (2008), Schick vs. The Gillette Co. (2005), The Procter & Gamble Co. vs. Ultreo, S.D.N.Y. (2008)

  • To sue, challenge, or negotiate - an internal counsel’s perspective

Motivating Case/ASTM Sensory Claims Guide  |  10:10am - 11am


  • NAD Case #6977 (2022) and NARB Panel #303 (2022) Proctor and Gamble (Febreze®)

  • Review of the ASTM Claims Guide

    • Evolution of the Guide content

    • Choosing a target population, product selection, sampling and handling, selection of markets

    • Claims: Superiority, unsurpassed, equivalence, non-comparative

Test Method, Design, Location, and Participants  |  11:10am - 12pm


  • Test options: Monadic, sequential, direct comparisons

  • Test design issues: Within-subject, matched samples, position and sequential effects, replication

  • Choosing a testing location and test subjects

  • NADCase #5425(2012) Church & Dwight Co.Inc. (Arm & Hammer® Sensitive Skin Plus Scent)

  • NAD Case #5782 (2014) The MOMbrands Company (Malt-O-Meal Cereals)

  • NAD Case #6041 (2016) Unilever United States, Inc. (Suave Essentials Body Wash)

NAD Mock Hearing; Overview of the NAD  |  1pm - 3pm


  • NAD Mock Hearing: General Mills - Yoplait vs Chobani

  • Preparing for an NAD hearing

  • NAD Case #5129(2009) MillerCoors, LLC (Miller Lite Beer)

  • NAD Case #5715 (2014) General Mills Inc. (Yoplait Blended Greek Yogurt)

Sensory and Hedonic Methods  |  3:10pm - 4pm


  • Methods: Difference, descriptive, hedonic

  • Data: Counts, ranking, rating scales

  • “Better” and “Greater”, hedonic, sensory, and technical claims

  • Attribute interdependencies

  • NAD Case #5866 (2015) Kimberly-Clark Corp. (Huggies Natural Care Wipes)

  • NAD Case #5874(2015) and NARB Panel #207 (2016) Chattam, Inc. (Nasacort)

  • NAD Case #5984 (2016) French’s Food Company (French’s Tomato Ketchup)

Wednesday, April 12

Consumer Relevance  |  8am - 9am


  • Setting action standards for consumer-perceived differences

  • Linking expert and consumer data

  • Clinical vs. statistical significance

  • Litigated Case: (S.D.N.Y. 2012) Church & Dwight Co., Inc vs. Clorox Co. (cat litter)
    9) NAD Case #5974 (2010) Comcast Communications, Inc. (Xfinity Internet, Television & Telephone Services)
    10) NAD Case #6025 (2010) Bausch & Lomb, Inc. (PeroxiClear Contact Lens Peroxide Solution)
    11) NAD Case #6131 (2017) Too Faced Cosmetics, LLC. (Better Than Sex Mascara)

Survey Principles  |  9:10am - 10am


  • Answering questions

  • Purpose of conducting surveys: Events and behaviors, attitudes and beliefs, subjective experiences

  • How respondents answer questions: Optimizing and satisficing

  • Filters to avoid acquiescence and no opinion responses

  • Survey questions: Biased, open-ended vs. closed-ended

  • Steps to improve survey questions

Consumer Perception Surveys  |  10:10am - 11am


  • A survey must include: Sample, design, questionnaire, analysis

  • Reliability and validity: Ecological, external, internal, face, construct

  • Bias: Code, position

  • Task instructions – importance and impact

  • Data collection methods

  • Target universe and size, controls, biased questions, improvements in design and analysis

  • Design Issues: Monadic vs sequential monadic (within subject), separating open-ended questions from close-ended

  • The stimulus is the label or ad, not the product itself

  • Why open-ended questions are not a good basis for quantification

  • Common design flaws

How NAD Has Ruled on Perception Surveys  |  11:10am - 12pm


  • Consumer takeaway surveys: NAD perspective, critique of cases
    12) NAD Case #5849 (2015) T-Mobile USA (More Data Capacity)
    13) NAD Case #5926 (2016) Comcast Cable Communications (Xfinity Cable TV)
    14) NAD Case #6009 (2016) Epson America, Inc. (Epson EcoTank Supertank Printers)

Consumer Takeaway Survey Research  |  1pm - 2pm


  • Independent research on the Bayer Advanced fertilizer case
    15) NAD Case #6033 (2016) Bayer CropScience US (Bayer Advanced 3-in-1 Weed and Feed for Southern Lawns)

Analysis - Interpretation and Communication  |  2:10pm - 3pm


  • Hypothesis testing

  • Determining statistical significance and confidence bounds

  • Communicating claim requirements to the business side
    16) NAD Case #5569 (2013) InterHealth Nutraceuticals (Zychrome Dietary Supplement)
    17) NAD Case #5755 (2014) The Procter & Gamble Co. (Olay Sensitive Body Wash)
    18) NAD Case #6236 (2018) Abbott Nutrition (Similac Human Milk Fortifier) Litigated Case: (S.D.N.Y. 1994) Avon Products vs. S.C. Johnson & Son, Inc. (Skin-So-Soft)

Test Power  |  3:10pm - 4pm


  • The meaning of power

  • Planning experiments and reducing cost

  • Sample sizes for claims support tests

  • Managing Risks: Advertiser claim, competitor challenge
    19) NAD Case #6065 (2017) Shell Oil Co. (Shell V-Power NiTRO+ Premium Gasoline)
    20) NAD Case #6164 (2018) The Proctor & Gamble Co. (Finish® Quantum® Max Automatic Dishwasher Detergent)

Thursday, April 13

Handling No Difference/No Preference Responses  |  8am - 9am


  • No preference option analysis

  • Power comparisons: Dropping, equal and proportional distribution

  • Statistical models and psychological models

  • ASTM recommendation
    21) NAD Case #5453 (2012) Ocean Spray Cranberries, Inc. (Ocean Spray Cranberry Juice) 22) NAD Case #6037 (2016) Mizkan America, Inc. (RAGU Homestyle Traditional Sauce)

Testing for Equivalence and Unsurpassed Claims  |  9:10am - 10am


  • How the equivalence hypothesis differs from difference testing

  • ASTM requirements for an unsurpassed claim

  • The paradox of finding support for superiority, unsurpassed, and equivalence; the need for a minimum standard for superiority

  • FDA method for qualifying generic drugs: The TOST
    23) NAD Case #5609 (2013) Starbucks Corp. (Verismo Single-Serve Coffee System)
    24) NAD Case #5822 (2015) Kimberly-Clark Global Sales, LLC (Huggies® Little Snugglers Diapers)
    25) NAD Case #5829 and NARB Panel #202 (2015) Bayer HealthCare, LLC (Claritin and Claritin-D)

Ratio, Multiplicative, and Count-Based Claims  |  10:10am - 11am


  • The difference between ratio and multiplicative claims

  • Examples of multiplicative claims ♦ Count-based claims (e.g.,“9 out of 10 women found our product reduces wrinkles”)
    26) NAD Case #5107 (2009) Ciba Vision Corp. (Dailies Aqua Comfort Plus)
    27) NAD Case #5416 (2012) LG Electronics USA, Inc. (Cinema 3D TV & 3D Glasses)
    28) NAD Case #5484 (2012) Reynolds Consumer Products (Hefty® Slider Bags)
    29) NAD Case #5779 (2014) S.C. Johnson & Son, Inc. (Scrubbing Bubbles Heavy Duty Cleaner with fantastik & Scrubbing Bubbles Bleach 5-in-1 All Purpose Cleaner with fantastik)
    30) NAD Case #5934 (2016) Rust-Oleum Corp. (Painter’s Touch Ultra Cover 2X Spray Paint)

“Up To” Claims and Conclusion  |  11:10am - 12pm


  • Definition and support for an “up to” claim

  • FTC opinion on windows marketers claim

  • “Up to” energy savings claim at the NAD
    31) NAD Case #5876 (2015) The Procter & Gamble Co. (Duracell Coppertop & Duracell Quantum Alkaline Batteries)



Please enter your information below to register for this course. Those registering 2 or more attendees from the same company are eligible for a 10% discount on the 2nd registration. Please contact us before registering if you are eligible for a discounted rate. 

bottom of page