"Identifying Misleading Information in an Argument" Please respond to the following:
March 31, 2021
Network upgrade:
March 31, 2021

Introduction
The purpose of the Core Assessment is to introduce students to database analysis in consumer behavior, and decision making based on data (CLO 2, 3, 4 & 5). Students will:

Use the Student Data File located in the student file folder.
Analyze the data and explain the marketing implications as it relates to using customer profiles for future marketing strategy.

Directions
Use the DDB Life Style StudyTM Data located in the student data files to analyze the following questions:

Using the DDB data (Tables 1B through 7B) describe the major determinants of the following search-related behaviors and beliefs. What are the marketing implications?

Consult consumer reports before making major purchases
Information in advertising helps me make better decisions

Some consumers feel more technology savvy than others. Examine the DDB data in Tables 1B through 7B to determine what characterizes one who is likely to feel tech savvy.
Using Table 3B, specifically examine the relationship between consumer perceptions of being tech savvy and the two search-related variables in Question 1. What are the relationships and implications?

Using the questions provided, please write a 2-3 page report (in essay format) detailing your analysis of the case. Use the following format:

Double-spaced Microsoft Word document using 1 inch left and right margins.
Formatted following APA formatting rules.
Integrate Consumer behavior theory from the textbook and other sources.
Provide a reference page and in-text citations.
Enter page numbers on all pages, including the first page.
Spell check and proofread your report

Rubric
DDB Case Analysis

DDB Case Analysis

Criteria
Ratings
Pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSummary of Case

10.0 pts
Exceptional
Exceptional summary of case, thoroughly discussing all relevant Points

8.0 pts
Exceeds Expectations
Provides a thorough summary of case, mentioning all relevant points

6.0 pts
Meets Expectations
An adequate summary of the case, mentioning most of the relevant points. Maximum points

4.0 pts
Does Not Meet Expectations
Leaves out 1-2 important aspects of the case demonstrating a less than thorough understanding of the case.

2.0 pts
Unacceptable
Leaves out 3 or more important aspects of the case demonstrating a less than thorough understanding of the case.

10.0 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeInterpretation of Data

10.0 pts
Exceptional
Demonstrates outstanding understanding of the data with accurate interpretation

8.0 pts
Exceeds Expectations
Demonstrates a thorough understanding of the data with accurate interpretation

6.0 pts
Meets Expectations
Demonstrates a passable understanding of the data with mostly accurate interpretation.

4.0 pts
Does Not Meet Expectations
Demonstrates a less than thorough understanding of the data making 3-5 mistakes in interpretation.

2.0 pts
Unacceptable
Demonstrates a less than thorough understanding of the data making more than 5 mistakes in interpretation

10.0 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeUnderstanding of Concepts Involved

10.0 pts
Exceptional
Demonstrates a remarkable understanding of the concepts involved

8.0 pts
Exceeds Expectations
Demonstrates a good understanding of the concepts involved.

6.0 pts
Meets Expectations
Demonstrates a fair understanding of the concepts involved.

4.0 pts
Does Not Meet Expectations
Demonstrate a less than impressive understanding of the concepts involved.

0.0 pts
Unacceptable
Demonstrates little if any of the concepts involved.

10.0 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeOrganization

10.0 pts
Exceptional
Written work is exceptionally well organized with clear headings and subheadings. Tables and charts are especially clear.

8.0 pts
Exceeds Expectations
Written work is well organized with clear headings and subheadings. Tables and charts are easy to understand.

6.0 pts
Meets Expectations
Written work is fairly well organized with some headings and subheadings lacking clarity. Tables and charts could use improvement

4.0 pts
Does Not Meet Expectations
Fair but some sections seem out of place. Some headings may be missing. Tables difficult to understand.

0.0 pts
Unacceptable
Fair but some sections seem out of place. Some headings may be missing. Tables difficult to understand.

10.0 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWriting Style, Grammar, Spelling and Formatting

5.0 pts
Exceptional
Writing style is outstanding throughout the paper and appropriate for this type of paper. The plan has been thoroughly spellchecked and proofread. Almost no grammatical or spelling errors. No formatting errors.

4.0 pts
Exceeds Expectations
Writing style is uniform throughout the paper and appropriate for this type of paper. The plan has been thoroughly spellchecked and proofread. Some grammatical or spelling errors. Some formatting errors.

3.0 pts
Meets Expectations
Writing style is somewhat choppy throughout the paper and not totally appropriate for this type of paper. A few spelling, proofreading, grammatical and formatting errors.

2.0 pts
Does Not Meet Expectations
There are noticeable spelling and grammatical errors. Some formatting errors.

0.0 pts
Unacceptable
There are noticeable spelling and grammatical errors. Some formatting errors.

5.0 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeReferences

5.0 pts
Exceptional
Material used in the writing of this report is extremely well referenced both within the document and on the reference page. References are very good. 4-5 references.

4.0 pts
Exceeds Expectations
Material used in the writing of this report is appropriately referenced both within the document and on the reference page. References are good. 2-3 references.

3.0 pts
Meets Expectations
Material used in the writing of this report is referenced with minor errors, within the document or on the reference page. References are acceptable. 2 references

2.0 pts
Does Not Meet Expectations
Material used in the writing of this report is referenced with minor errors, within the document or on the reference page. References are acceptable. 2 references

0.0 pts
Unacceptable
No citations or references, or references are of very poor/unreliable quality. 0 references. *plagiarism on the final draft of the case study can result in a 0 on the entire report!!!

5.0 pts

Total Points: 50.0

 
Do you need a similar assignment done for you from scratch? We have qualified writers to help you. We assure you an A+ quality paper that is free from plagiarism. Order now for an Amazing Discount!Use Discount Code “Newclient” for a 15% Discount!NB: We do not resell papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

"Is this question part of your assignment? We Can Help!"

Essay Writing Service
ORDER NOW