TEST

Blogs

Home
Blogs

Get In Touch

Forty participant places filled: recruiting for a San Mateo playtest

Back

A recent San Mateo playtest required 40 participants across four testing days, with four additional reserves.

All 40 participant places were filled. The client described the group as “really excellent”, particularly given the short recruitment turnaround.

Behind that result were separate decisions about screening, validation, selection and preparation. The figures show why those stages matter—and where our delivery needs improving.

Screening identified who could be considered

Of 195 screening responses, 92 applicants passed the initial requirements.
That established eligibility based on their answers. It did not yet establish how well they could discuss the gaming experience relevant to the research.
Applicants who passed were invited to complete video validation.

Validation added information the screener couldn’t provide

Sixty-five applicants completed validation. Of those, 60 passed and five did not.
The main issue among those five was difficulty discussing the approved games in sufficient depth for the study.
That does not establish dishonesty. It does show the distinction between selecting qualifying answers and being able to describe relevant experience meaningfully.
Validation gave us additional information on which to base selection.

Some eligible applicants did not progress

Twenty-seven of the 92 screener-qualified applicants did not complete validation, despite repeated email and text reminders.
Their suitability remained unassessed at that stage. We cannot assume they lacked relevant experience or would have been unreliable participants.
This is a separate recruitment challenge: understanding why people disengage and making the next step clear and accessible while retaining the checks the study needs.

Participant attendance was strong; reserve attendance wasn’t

We booked 40 participants and four reserves.
All 40 participants attended and completed their required sessions. One of the four reserves attended; three did not.
Those results should be reported separately. Full participant attendance met the study’s requirement, but the backup provision fell short of what we had arranged.
Reserve attendance remains a delivery responsibility even when every participant place is filled.

What the client experienced

The client told us: “It was a really excellent group of players, which is extra impressive given the short turnaround time for recruitment – so a huge thank you to you and your team!”
That feedback supports the participant-quality outcome. The recruitment figures help explain the work behind it, while keeping the limitations visible.
At Gromotion, we want to be judged on the players delivered and how we manage the whole commitment—including the parts that need improvement.