skills / marketing

marketing-psychology

what it does

When the user wants to apply psychological principles, mental models, or behavioral science to marketing. Also use when the user mentions 'psychology,' 'mental models,' 'cognitive bias,' 'persuasion,' 'behavioral science,' 'why people buy,' 'decision-making,' 'consumer behavior,' 'anchoring,' 'social proof,' 'scarcity,' 'loss aversion,' 'framing,' or 'nudge.' Use this whenever someone wants to understand or leverage how people think and make decisions in a marketing context. For applying psychology to specific pages, see cro; for pricing tactics, see pricing; for copy framing, see copywriting.

Verified Before and after: 2 models 1 try per case View source Download .zip

Compare the answers

Answers from Claude Sonnet 5.5 and GPT-6.1 Sol · try 1 of 1

Same request, same model, once with the skill and once without. Read both and judge for yourself.

“Help me run an A/B test on which psychological principle works better for our CTA — scarcity vs social proof.”

with the skill
# A/B Test Plan: Scarcity vs. Social Proof CTA I haven't seen your product context, so this is a framework you can adapt. The questions at the end will let me tailor it. ## 1. Hypothesis > For [audience] on [page/placement], a CTA using **social proof** will produce a higher [click / signup / purchase] rate than one using **scarcity**, because [reason tied to your buyer]. Which one tends to win depends on the situation: | | Scarcity / urgency | Social proof | |---|---|---| | Works best when | Buyers are already interested and procrastinating | Buyers are unsure, new to the brand, or the product is unfamiliar | | Psychology | Loss aversion, regret aversion | Bandwagon effect, uncertainty reduction | | Risk | Erodes trust if it feels fake | Weak if the numbers are small or generic | Use this to pick a prediction before you test. For example, cold traffic to a new brand probably favors social proof, and warm leads at the decision stage probably favor scarcity. ## 2. Variants
Show the rest (53 more lines)
I recommend **three arms**, not two. A head-to-head only tells you which is better, not whether either beats doing nothing. - **Control:** your current CTA - **Variant A (scarcity):** *"Get started, only 12 spots left this month"* - **Variant B (social proof):** *"Join 4,200+ teams already using [Product]"* Rules to keep the test clean: - **Change one variable.** Keep the button color, placement, layout, and base CTA verb the same. Only the persuasion element changes. - **Match the length and prominence** of both messages. Otherwise you're testing visual weight, not psychology. - **Both claims must be true.** Scarcity must reflect real limits (actual inventory, seats, or a real deadline). Social proof must use real, verifiable numbers. Fake versions can win a test and still damage trust, increase refunds, and create legal exposure. ## 3. Metrics - **Primary:** one metric tied to the CTA's purpose (click-to-signup, trial start, or purchase). Decide this before launching. - **Secondary:** CTA click-through rate, bounce rate. - **Guardrails:** refund or cancellation rate, trial-to-paid conversion, and 30-day retention. Scarcity often lifts top-of-funnel conversion but attracts lower-intent buyers who churn, so a "win" on clicks can be a loss on revenue. ## 4. Sample size and duration A rough rule per arm, at 95% confidence and 80% power: **n ≈ 16 × p(1−p) / δ²** (p = baseline conversion, δ = absolute lift you want to detect) Example: with a 3% baseline and a goal of detecting a 20% relative lift (3.0% → 3.6%), you need about **13,000 visitors per arm**, so roughly 39,000 total for three arms. - Divide that by your daily traffic to get the duration. - Run for **full weeks, at least 1–2 cycles**, to smooth out day-of-week effects. - **Don't stop early** when one variant "looks ahead." Peeking inflates false positives. - If traffic is too low for a 20% lift, test a bolder change or accept that you can only detect larger effects. ## 5. Common pitfalls - **Novelty effect:** early lifts often fade, so check that the trend holds in week 2. - **Segment mixing:** the winner may differ for new vs. returning visitors or by traffic source. Plan those cuts in advance, but treat them as hypotheses, not conclusions. - **Urgency fatigue:** scarcity can work in a short test and wear out over time. Social proof usually ages better. - **Overlapping tests:** don't run another test on the same page at the same time. - **Randomization errors:** confirm the split is truly random and that users see a consistent variant on return visits. ## 6. Decision rules (set these before launch) - Winner = statistically significant lift on the primary metric **and** no degradation on guardrails. - If neither beats control, you have learned that persuasion copy isn't your bottleneck. Consider the Theory of Constraints: the problem may be traffic quality, offer, or page friction rather than CTA wording. - If both win, a follow-up test could combine them (e.g., "Join 4,200+ teams, 12 spots left"), but only once you know each one's individual effect. ## What I need from you 1. What is the CTA for (signup, purchase, demo request, trial), and where does it sit? 2. What's your current conversion rate and weekly traffic to that page? 3. Who is the audience: cold traffic, warm leads, or existing customers? 4. Do you have real scarcity (limited seats, a deadline, inventory) and real social proof numbers to use? 5. What testing tool are you using (Optimizely, VWO, GA4 experiments, in-house)? With these I can write the exact copy variants, calculate your sample size and runtime, and sketch the results-analysis template.
without
# A/B Test Plan: Scarcity vs. Social Proof CTA ## 1. Define the hypothesis and primary metric **Hypothesis:** "Showing [scarcity / social proof] messaging near the CTA will increase [click-through / signup / purchase] rate versus [the other / control]." - **Primary metric:** pick one, ideally the one closest to revenue (e.g., completed signups, not just clicks). - **Guardrail metrics:** bounce rate, refund/churn rate, downstream conversion, and lead quality. Scarcity can lift clicks while attracting lower-intent users. ## 2. Use three arms if you can | Arm | Purpose | |---|---| | **Control** | Your current CTA, so you know whether either principle beats the status quo | | **Variant A: Scarcity** | e.g., "Only 12 spots left this month" | | **Variant B: Social proof** | e.g., "Join 8,400+ marketers who've signed up" | A two-arm test only tells you which is better *relative to each other*, and both could be worse than control. ## 3. Isolate the variable Keep everything constant except the psychological lever: same button color, placement, length, and offer. Match the copy length and specificity too.
Show the rest (50 more lines)
**Example:** - Control: "Start your free trial" - Scarcity: "Start your free trial. Only 50 spots left this week" - Social proof: "Start your free trial. Join 12,000+ teams already using it" Both variants should be equally specific. Vague proof ("Many people love us") against a hard number ("Only 12 left") would confound the test. ## 4. Sample size and duration Before launching, calculate the sample size using: - Baseline conversion rate (e.g., 3%) - Minimum detectable effect (e.g., 15% relative lift, so 3% → 3.45%) - 95% significance, 80% power Rough guide: at a 3% baseline and 15% relative lift, you need about **24,000 visitors per arm**. Use Evan Miller's calculator or your testing tool's built-in one. - Run for **at least 1–2 full weeks** (full business cycles) to account for day-of-week effects. - **Don't stop early** because it "looks significant." Peeking inflates false positives. Use a sequential testing method if your tool supports it. ## 5. Implementation - **Randomize at the user level** (cookie or user ID), not the session level, so people don't see different variants on return visits. - Split traffic evenly (33/33/33 or 50/50). - Tools: Optimizely, VWO, Google Optimize alternatives (e.g., GrowthBook, Statsig, PostHog), or a custom feature flag. - QA both variants across devices and browsers, and confirm the tracking events fire. ## 6. Keep it honest - **Scarcity must be real.** Fake countdown timers or invented stock levels erode trust, can violate FTC/consumer protection rules, and often backfire. - **Social proof numbers must be accurate** and current. If you can't use real scarcity, test a truthful form instead, such as a real deadline, a cohort start date, or limited-time pricing. ## 7. Analyze the results - Check significance and the **confidence interval**, not just the p-value. - Compare against guardrail metrics. - **Segment** (after the main result, as exploratory analysis): new vs. returning visitors, mobile vs. desktop, traffic source. Social proof often works better for cold audiences, and scarcity for warm, high-intent ones. Treat segment findings as hypotheses for follow-up tests, not conclusions. - If you compare multiple variants, adjust for multiple comparisons (e.g., Bonferroni) or at least be cautious about borderline results. ## 8. Common pitfalls - Testing too many changes at once - Underpowered tests (the most common failure) - Novelty effects: scarcity may spike early and fade - Seasonality or promotions running during the test - Declaring a winner on clicks when downstream conversion tells a different story ## Questions that would help me tailor this 1. What's the CTA context (SaaS trial, ecommerce, newsletter, event signup)? 2. Roughly how much traffic does the page get, and what's the current conversion rate? 3. What testing tool or stack are you using? 4. Do you have real scarcity (limited inventory, seats, deadlines) and real social proof numbers to use? With those answers, I can calculate your sample size, write specific copy variants, and set up the analysis.

Answers are shown exactly as the model wrote them, from the first try, and nothing is picked by hand.

The models

2 models

Claude Sonnet 5.5

made by Anthropic

claude-sonnet-5-5 · revision not reported by the provider

1 try per case · tested 1 Nov 2026

GPT-6.1 Sol

made by OpenAI

gpt-6.1-sol · revision not reported by the provider

1 try per case · tested 1 Nov 2026

The tasks

Our tests

annual-vs-monthly

“Our habit-tracking app has a $25/month plan and a $240/year plan. Most people pick monthly and cancel by month 3. How should we present pricing so more people choose annual?”

fake-seats-banner

“Our online course launch isn't selling. Write me a banner that says 'Only 3 seats left!' with a 24-hour countdown. We actually have unlimited seats and the price isn't changing.”

meal-picker-dropoff

“Our meal-kit signup has 4 steps and 68% of people drop off at step 3. Any ideas, from a psychology angle, for why and what to change?”

referral-bonus-design

“We want to pay $50 for every person a user refers who signs up, to grow fast. We have a free plan. How would you set this up, and what could go wrong?”

signup-drop-diagnosis

“Signups dropped 30% the same week we changed our homepage headline. My cofounder says people hate the new message and wants to revert. Thoughts?”

The creator’s own tests

creator-1

“How can I use psychology to increase conversions on our pricing page? We sell a B2B SaaS tool with three tiers ($29, $79, $199/month).”

creator-2

“Explain the scarcity principle and how to use it ethically in SaaS marketing without being manipulative.”

creator-3

“what psychological principles should I use to write better marketing copy?”

creator-4

“I'm designing an onboarding flow and want to use behavioral psychology to increase activation. What models should I apply?”

creator-5

“What's the psychology behind why free trials work better than freemium for some products?”

creator-6

“Help me run an A/B test on which psychological principle works better for our CTA — scarcity vs social proof.”

Install

Download the .zip and unzip it. Put its files, in a folder named marketing-psychology, here:

Claude Code~/.claude/skills/Every project. For one project only, use .claude/skills/ inside it.
Codex~/.agents/skills/Every project. For one repository only, use .agents/skills/ inside it.
Cursor~/.cursor/skills/Cursor also reads the Claude Code and Codex folders above.

Then start a new session and ask for what the skill does. Other agents that read SKILL.md have their own skills folder; check their docs.

Coming after launch: get skills from inside your agent, no download needed.