PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS PART 2
Description:
The Practical Applications Part 2 (PA2) is an individual report that allows you to demonstrate
your command of the theories, concepts, and models that you learn in this unit. The tasks in
this report are designed to allow you to get an insight into how businesses and organisations
apply these theories and models to influence consumer attitudes, decisions, and behaviour.
PA2 is to be submitted by 9:30am (Melbourne time) on Monday 22 May 2023.
Note that you do not need to define any of the terms you use. Rather, the PA2 assessment is
designed to assess your in-depth understanding of the theory and your ability to apply this
theory to real-life situations.
Learning Outcomes Achieved:
The PA2 assessment tests your achievement of the following learning outcomes:
• Demonstrate a detailed understanding of consumer psychology and the main factors
that influence consumer behaviour.
• Use consumer behaviour concepts to analyze and evaluate the effectiveness of
marketing strategies.
• Understand how this knowledge can be used to help consumers make better and more
informed decisions.
Requirements, Marking Criteria and Due Dates:
• Please see the following pages for the submission requirements, marketing criteria, and
due dates for PA2 Assessment.
Practical Applications Part 2
Task 1. Understanding consumer decision making: heuristics (25 marks).
The two ads below rely on different heuristics to persuade the target audience.
a. Identify which of the two ads relies on the anchoring and adjustment heuristic and
which one relies on the availability heuristic (10 marks).
b. Then, explain how EACH of the ads uses the respective heuristic (anchoring and
adjustment or availability) to achieve its goal. What is the target behaviour the
message aims to promote? How does reliance on the respective heuristic promote this
behaviour (15 marks)?
Ad 1:
Ad 2:
Task 2. Understanding consumer decision-making: choice models (30 marks).
Imagine that you are shopping for a backpack. You have narrowed your choice down to 4
options - backpack A, backpack B, backpack C, and backpack D. Assume that there are 4
evaluation criteria that are important to you when choosing a backpack. These four criteria
are (in alphabetical order): durability, number of pockets, style/design, and price. The four
backpacks have been rated along each of these criteria by other consumers who purchased the
backpacks previously. In the table, you can see the average rating for each of the four
backpacks on each of the four criteria. Note that ratings are out of 5, the higher the rating, the
better. A higher rating on price means the option is cheaper.
Evaluative
criteria
Criteria
importance
Backpack
A
Backpack
B
Backpack
C
Backpack
D
durability 4 4 5 2
number of
pockets
5 4 3 4
style/design 4 4 2 5
price 3 5 5 3
In the “criteria importance” column, assign importance weights, according to your own
preference, for each of the evaluative criteria. Record these weights as percentages (note that
they have to sum up to 100!).
a. Based on the criteria weights you assigned, and the backpacks’ ratings on each of the
criteria, indicate which backpack you would choose if you used the lexicographic
decision model and why (15 marks).
b. Then, indicate which backpack you would choose if you were to use the
compensatory decision model and why (15 marks).
Task 3. Decision making and Prospect Theory (15 marks)
Consider the following scenario: You are the manager of a fire rescue service preparing for
the fire season. This summer season, fires are expected to destroy 600 homes in your area.
The fire fighter teams that you manage have to choose between 2 programs to combat the
fires: Program A and Program B.
You can present to your fire fighter teams the probabilities associated with Program A and
Program B in two different ways: Version 1 and Version 2 (see below). The information in
the two versions is the same, but framed differently.
According to Prospect Theory, which version (1 or 2) should you present to your firefighter
teams, if you want them to choose Program B? Explain your answer!
Version 1
Program A: Program B
200 homes will be saved There’s 33% chance that 600
homes will be saved and
67% chance that 0 homes will
be saved
Version 2
Program A: Program B
400 homes will burn There’s 33% chance that 0
homes will burn and
67% chance that 600 homes
will burn
Task 4. Understanding consumer culture: Using psychographics to segment the market
(25 marks).
Companies often aim to reach a particular subsection of consumers (target segment) through
their advertisements. The advertisements, therefore, are designed to appeal to the chosen
target segment. Consider the Godiva Chocolatier ad below.
a) Describe the target segment that the company seeks to reach with this ad (5 marks).
b) What bases for segmentation do you think the marketers of Godiva chocolates used
to identify this target market? Describe two (2) bases for segmentation that are
relevant in this case. Justify your answer (20 marks).
Note that your answer should be specific to the advertisement above.
At least one of the segmentation bases you identify should be a psychographics one.
Criteria Weighting
1a 10%
1b 15%
2a 15%
2b 15%
3 15%
4a 5%
4b 20%
Written expression, formatting, referencing 5%
Total 100%
Formatting Requirements:
• No cover page is necessary. At the top of the first page simply use the heading
“Practical Applications 2” and indicate your full name (first name, surname) and
student ID number.
• Paper: A4 size, 1-inch margins; text: 12-point Times New Roman, double-spaced.
• Maximum of 1,200 words (this does not include appendices or diagrams/figures).
Note, however, that you do not need to reach the upper 1,200 words limit. Quantity
does not equal quality!
• Please use headings and subheadings, where appropriate.
Referencing:
It is important that you reference all sources that you use in your work (including textbook,
peer reviewed journals, trade press, newspapers, online sources, etc.). It is also important
that you draw on credible source material (references) and correctly cite these sources in-
text and in your references. It is expected that 3 (three) academic references will be sourced.
• Appropriate use of APA style- in text (quick tips:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R5igNRmKLug ;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=weD9a-ZL0AY)
• Appropriate use of APA style in references (quick tips:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uq7hYWh0Xdg)
Marking Criteria:
• Practical Applications 2 is weighted at 18% of the total marks available in this unit.
Please refer to the table above for a breakdown of the marks for this assessment.
• Marks are awarded based on your correct and thoughtful application of the relevant
theories, concepts or models.
• For each day late submission (up to 7 days after the deadline, inclusive), there will be a
10% penalty. For submissions over 7 days late, a mark of 0 will be awarded.
Conditions for use of generative AI:
• In this assessment, you must not use generative artificial intelligence (AI) to generate
any materials or content in relation to the assessment task.
• Assessments written with the assistance of generative AI will be receive a Fail mark.
Due Date: by 9:30am (Melbourne time) on Monday, 22 May 2023.
Submission: Submit in Moodle in section “Submit Your Assignments Here.”
Extensions:
- The Chief Examiner may grant a short extension of up to five calendar days for
students experiencing short term exceptional circumstances such as illness, carer
responsibilities or car accident. Supporting documentation must be provided.
- For an extension longer than five calendar days, students must apply for special
consideration by completing the online form. For more details, see the Special
Consideration Procedure.
Practical Applications Part 2 Marking Rubric
Criteria Fail (0) Very poor (25) Pass (50) Reasonable (60) Good (70) Very good (80) Exemplary (100)
Q1a –
10%
Criteria not
addressed
or the
content is
off topic
0 marks
Poor understanding
of the relevant theory.
Key points are mostly
missing.
2.5 marks
Answer incomplete
or partially incorrect.
The argument is of
variable
depth/breadth. It is
OK in places but poor
in others. The
argument generally
lacks depth/breadth
and is mostly
descriptive.
5 marks
Reasonable understanding
of the relevant theory. The
arguments used have some
depth but focus is more on
description (vs. analysis or
insight). Key points are
there but may need more
elaboration. Link between
theory and practical case
not always clear.
6 marks

Good understanding of
the relevant theory and
its relation to the
practical example.
Answer is
comprehensive, but more
could be done to enhance
the depth and
persuasiveness of the
arguments.
7 marks
Very good understanding
of the relevant theory
and the link to the
practical example. The
arguments have good
depth and breadth,
several insightful points
raised.
8 marks
Excellent understanding
of the relevant theory
and how it relates to the
practical example. The
arguments used have
great depth and breadth.
They raise insightful
points and are
persuasively presented.
Outstanding answer.
10 marks
Q1b –
15%
Criteria not
addressed
or the
content is
off topic.
0 marks
Poor understanding
of the relevant theory.
Key points are mostly
missing.
3.8 marks
Answer incomplete
or partially incorrect.
The argument is of
variable
depth/breadth. It is
OK in places but poor
in others. The
argument generally
lacks depth/breadth
and is mostly
descriptive.
7.5 marks
Reasonable understanding
of the relevant theory. The
arguments used have some
depth but focus is more on
description (vs. analysis or
insight). Key points are
there but may need more
elaboration. Link between
theory and practical case
not always clear.
9 marks
Good understanding of
the relevant theory and
its relation to the
practical example.
Answer is
comprehensive, but more
could be done to enhance
the depth and
persuasiveness of the
arguments.
10.5 marks
Very good understanding
of the relevant theory
and the link to the
practical example. The
arguments have good
depth and breadth,
several insightful points
raised.
12 marks
Excellent understanding
of the relevant theory
and how it relates to the
practical example. The
arguments used have
great depth and breadth.
They raise insightful
points and are
persuasively presented.
Outstanding answer.
15 marks
Q2a –
15%
Criteria not
addressed
or the
content is
off topic.
0 marks
Poor understanding
of the relevant theory.
Key points are mostly
missing.
3.8 marks
Answer incomplete
or partially incorrect.
The argument is of
variable
depth/breadth. It is
OK in places but poor
in others. The
argument generally
lacks depth/breadth
and is mostly
descriptive.
7.5 marks
Reasonable understanding
of the relevant theory. The
arguments used have some
depth but focus is more on
description (vs. analysis or
insight). Key points are
there but may need more
elaboration. Link between
theory and practical case
not always clear.
9 marks
Good understanding of
the relevant theory and
its relation to the
practical example.
Answer is
comprehensive, but more
could be done to enhance
the depth and
persuasiveness of the
arguments.
10.5 marks
Very good understanding
of the relevant theory
and the link to the
practical example. The
arguments have good
depth and breadth,
several insightful points
raised.
12 marks
Excellent understanding
of the relevant theory
and how it relates to the
practical example. The
arguments used have
great depth and breadth.
They raise insightful
points and are
persuasively presented.
Outstanding answer.
15 marks
Q2b –
15%
Criteria not
addressed
or the
content is
off topic.
0 marks
Poor understanding
of the relevant theory.
Key points are mostly
missing.
3.8 marks
Answer incomplete
or partially incorrect.
The argument is of
variable
depth/breadth. It is
OK in places but poor
in others. The
argument generally
lacks depth/breadth
and is mostly
descriptive.
7.5 marks
Reasonable understanding
of the relevant theory. The
arguments used have some
depth but focus is more on
description (vs. analysis or
insight). Key points are
there but may need more
elaboration. Link between
theory and practical case
not always clear.
9 marks
Good understanding of
the relevant theory and
its relation to the
practical example.
Answer is
comprehensive, but more
could be done to enhance
the depth and
persuasiveness of the
arguments.
10.5 marks
Very good understanding
of the relevant theory
and the link to the
practical example. The
arguments have good
depth and breadth,
several insightful points
raised.
12 marks
Excellent understanding
of the relevant theory
and how it relates to the
practical example. The
arguments used have
great depth and breadth.
They raise insightful
points and are
persuasively presented.
Outstanding answer.
15 marks
Q3 –
15%
Criteria not
addressed
or the
content is
off topic.
0 marks
Poor understanding
of the relevant theory.
Key points are mostly
missing.
3.8 marks
Answer incomplete
or partially incorrect.
The argument is of
variable
depth/breadth. It is
OK in places but poor
in others. The
argument generally
lacks depth/breadth
and is mostly
descriptive.
7.5 marks
Reasonable understanding
of the relevant theory. The
arguments used have some
depth but focus is more on
description (vs. analysis or
insight). Key points are
there but may need more
elaboration. Link between
theory and practical case
not always clear.
9 marks
Good understanding of
the relevant theory and
its relation to the
practical example.
Answer is
comprehensive, but more
could be done to enhance
the depth and
persuasiveness of the
arguments.
10.5 marks
Very good understanding
of the relevant theory
and the link to the
practical example. The
arguments have good
depth and breadth,
several insightful points
raised.
12 marks
Excellent understanding
of the relevant theory
and how it relates to the
practical example. The
arguments used have
great depth and breadth.
They raise insightful
points and are
persuasively presented.
Outstanding answer.
15 marks
Q4a –
5%
Criteria not
addressed
Has ignored most of
the formatting
Follows some of the
guidelines. Frequent
Follows the guidelines
reasonably well. Some
Follows the guidelines
well. Some errors in
Follows most of the
guidelines. Occasional
Follows all of the
guidelines. No errors in
or the
content is
off topic.
0 marks
guidelines. Writing
difficult to follow.
Very frequent errors
in sentences
structure, spelling
and/or grammar.
Please urgently seek
assistance from the
Learning Skills
advisors.
https://www.monash.
edu/library/skills/reso
urces/we-will-
support-you-drop-in
1.3 marks
errors in grammar,
spelling, and
punctuation impede
understanding. Little
or no organisation to
the report. Ideas seem
scrambled and
disconnected. Details
do not fit with main
idea.
Some sources may
not have been
referenced.
2.5 marks
errors in grammar,
capitalisation, spelling, or
punctuation. Report is
reasonably well organised
but seems unfinished or
connection between details
and main ideas is not
always clear. Some
sources used may not have
been referenced.
3 marks
grammar, capitalisation,
spelling, and
punctuation. More can be
done to increase clarity
and logical flow of
presentation. Some
sources may not be
properly referenced.
3.5 marks
errors in grammar,
capitalisation, spelling,
and punctuation. Ideas
presented mostly in
logical, easy to follow
order. Transitions used to
show relationships
among ideas. Some
sources used nay not
have been properly
referenced.
4 marks
grammar, capitalisation,
spelling, and
punctuation. Ideas
presented always in
logical, easy to follow
order. Transitions used to
show relationships
among ideas. All sources
used have been properly
referenced.

5 marks
Q4b –
20%
Criteria not
addressed
or the
content is
off topic.
0 marks
Poor understanding
of the relevant theory.
Key points are mostly
missing.
5 marks
Answer incomplete
or partially incorrect.
The argument is of
variable
depth/breadth. It is
OK in places but poor
in others. The
argument generally
lacks depth/breadth
and is mostly
descriptive.
10 marks
Reasonable understanding
of the relevant theory. The
arguments used have some
depth but focus is more on
description (vs. analysis or
insight). Key points are
there but may need more
elaboration. Link between
theory and practical case
not always clear.
12 marks
Good understanding of
the relevant theory and
its relation to the
practical example.
Answer is
comprehensive, but more
could be done to enhance
the depth and
persuasiveness of the
arguments.
14 marks
Very good understanding
of the relevant theory
and the link to the
practical example. The
arguments have good
depth and breadth,
several insightful points
raised.
16 marks
Excellent understanding
of the relevant theory
and how it relates to the
practical example. The
arguments used have
great depth and breadth.
They raise insightful
points and are
persuasively presented.
Outstanding answer.
20 marks
Written
express
ion,
formatt
ing,
referen
cing -
5%
n/a Has ignored most of
the formatting
guidelines. Writing
difficult to follow.
Very frequent errors
in sentences
structure, spelling
and/or grammar.
Please urgently seek
assistance from the
Learning Skills
advisors.
https://www.monash.
edu/library/skills/reso
urces/we-will-
support-you-drop-in
1.3 marks
Follows some of the
guidelines. Frequent
errors in grammar,
spelling, and
punctuation impede
understanding. Little
or no organisation to
the report. Ideas seem
scrambled and
disconnected. Details
do not fit with main
idea.
Some sources may
not have been
referenced.
2.5 marks
Follows the guidelines
reasonably well. Some
errors in grammar,
capitalisation, spelling, or
punctuation. Report is
reasonably well organised
but seems unfinished or
connection between details
and main ideas is not
always clear. Some
sources used may not have
been referenced.
3 marks
Follows the guidelines
well. Some errors in
grammar, capitalisation,
spelling, and
punctuation. More can be
done to increase clarity
and logical flow of
presentation. Some
sources may not be
properly referenced.
3.5 marks
Follows most of the
guidelines. Occasional
errors in grammar,
capitalisation, spelling,
and punctuation. Ideas
presented mostly in
logical, easy to follow
order. Transitions used to
show relationships
among ideas. Some
sources used nay not
have been properly
referenced.
4 marks
Follows all of the
guidelines. No errors in
grammar, capitalisation,
spelling, and
punctuation. Ideas
presented always in
logical, easy to follow
order. Transitions used to
show relationships
among ideas. All sources
used have been properly
referenced.
5 marks