| name | pretest-lab |
| description | Pre-launch quality gate for design and communication assets. Pretest any design or communication asset before it ships: pitch decks, investor presentations, landing pages, LinkedIn posts, X threads, ads, posters, key visuals, social creatives, one-pagers, brochures, CVs, cover letters, email templates. Communication only exists when it lands. This skill tests whether it does. Built on three established frameworks, stacked in one pass: the Limbic Model (Häusel) for psychographic archetypes, Decoded neuromarketing (Phil Barden, building on Kahneman) for System 1 cognition, and a Creative Expert Roundtable (Ogilvy, Scher, Spiekermann, Cialdini, Duarte, Krug, Heath, Wells Lawrence and others) for distilled human expertise. Plus A/B comparison. Triggers: "pretest", "test this", "does this work", "review this deck", "review my CV", "review my cover letter", "test this poster", "check this ad", "pretest this pitch", "which variant wins", "A/B test", "audience reaction", "before launch review", "quality gate". Also trigger when a user uploads any communication asset and asks whether it lands.
|
| argument-hint | [image-or-pdf-upload] [optional: briefing context, target audience, channel, goal] |
Pretest Lab
A pre-launch quality gate for design and communication assets. Communication only exists when it lands. This skill tests whether it does, before it ships.
What used to be focus groups, expert interviews and gut feeling now runs as a synthetic research setup. Limbic archetypes instead of probands. Neuromarketing instead of guesswork. Creative Director lenses instead of expert panels. Minutes instead of weeks.
Run it on
Any design or communication asset that has to land with a specific audience.
- Pitch decks, investor presentations, sales decks
- Landing pages, one-pagers, brochures
- LinkedIn posts, X threads, social copy
- Ads, posters, key visuals, social creatives
- CVs, cover letters, portfolio cases
- Email templates, newsletter layouts
- Any artefact where the work depends on the audience getting it
The methodology is the same across asset types. Framework weights and expert-lens selection calibrate to the asset.
Principle
Every communication asset has one job: stand out in seconds, transmit a message, trigger a reaction. The reaction differs by asset type, the principle does not. A pitch deck has to land with investors. A CV has to land with a hiring manager. A poster has to land with someone walking past. A LinkedIn post has to land in the first sentence. This skill tests whether the asset does that job, against the audience that actually has to receive it.
Not a taste debate. A structured test against audience archetypes, neuromarketing principles, frameworks and documented expert lenses. Output is always concrete. What works, what doesn't, what to change.
When to use
When a communication asset is uploaded as an image or PDF and the user wants to know whether it lands. Primary use case: a quality gate before delivery to a client, before campaign launch, before sending the deck, before applying for the role.
When NOT to use
Pure text without a visual artefact (exception: LinkedIn posts and X threads can be tested as text-only). Website information architecture or full UX flows (this skill tests assets, not journeys). Strategy concepts without a finished output.
Input
Image upload (PNG, JPG) or PDF. Multi-page assets like decks: test the asset as a whole, slide-by-slide, or focus on critical slides (hero, ask, close). For A/B comparison: multiple uploads in one batch.
The Limbic Model (Archetype Framework)
Based on Hans-Georg Häusel, a practitioner heuristic from neuromarketing practice.
Calibration first. Limbic is a practitioner heuristic, not an independently validated instrument. The underlying building blocks are solid neuroscience (dominance of the unconscious, emotional systems, approach-avoidance). The specific map and the seven archetypes are Häusel's own synthesis, validated within his own instrument. Limbic sharpens the test and makes it traceable, it does not turn it into empirical market research. Never frame it as proof, always as a reasoned assumption.
The three emotional systems. Every person has all three, weighted differently. The dominant one steers perception and decision.
- Balance: safety, stability, comfort, trust, reliability, risk avoidance.
- Dominance: assertion, status, performance, control, autonomy, efficiency.
- Stimulance: curiosity, variety, novelty, creativity, individuality, experience.
The seven Limbic Archetypes per Häusel:
- Harmoniser: high social and family orientation, low status orientation, desire for safety. Balance with some Stimulance.
- Open: openness to the new, comfort, tolerance, soft pleasure. Balance and Stimulance.
- Hedonist: active search for the new, high individualism, high spontaneity. Stimulance.
- Adventurer: high risk tolerance, low impulse control. Stimulance and Dominance.
- Performer: high performance orientation, ambition, high status orientation. Dominance and Stimulance.
- Disciplined: high sense of duty, low consumption appetite, attention to detail. Dominance and Balance.
- Traditionalist: low future orientation, desire for order and security. Balance.
Representative distribution Germany (Burda Typologie der Wünsche): Harmoniser 30 %, Traditionalists 19 %, Hedonists 13 %, Open 12 %, Disciplined 11 %, Performers 9 %, Adventurers 6 %.
Age shift, neurochemically documented. With age, testosterone and dopamine decrease, cortisol increases. Result: away from Stimulance and Dominance, toward Balance. Youth (18 to 25) skews Stimulance-heavy. At 60 plus, roughly 72 % sit in the Balance field.
Application: First determine the dominant emotional system of the target audience. Then test whether the asset addresses exactly that system.
Phase 0: Load Context
- Which project, brand or candidate? If clear from upload, route directly. If unclear, ask.
- Brand foundation, design principles, messaging concepts, candidate background available: skim them.
- No documented audience: ask in Phase 1.
Phase 1: Sharpen the Brief
Maximum four questions, only what isn't in context.
- Asset type and channel. Poster, social ad, pitch deck, landing page, CV, cover letter, LinkedIn post, one-pager.
- Goal. Awareness, lead, sale, follow-up meeting, interview invitation, sign-off, engagement.
- Target audience. Role, seniority, industry, demographics, life context.
- Awareness stage. Unaware, problem-aware, solution-aware, product-aware, most aware.
Phase 2: Build the Archetype Panel
Three to five Limbic archetypes, each embodied as a concrete persona.
- Documented audience segments from briefing or brand foundation. Derive the archetype mix from there.
- If not documented: derive from briefing and channel, calibrated against the DE distribution.
Each archetype gets a concrete persona embodiment: name, age, role, context in which they see the asset, baseline attitude, awareness stage. At least one persona should be skeptical or disinterested.
Senior investors tend to skew Disciplined and Performer. Senior creative directors lean Hedonist and Open. Hiring managers in finance lean Disciplined and Traditionalist. LinkedIn audience in design and tech leans Performer and Hedonist.
Lock in the dominant emotional system of the overall target audience. This is the benchmark for Limbic resonance in Phase 4.
Phase 3: Simulate Archetype Reactions
5-second test (or longer for decks and long-form). First person voice:
- What do I see first? Where does my eye stick?
- What do I think this is? Do I understand the point in the available time?
- What does it trigger? Curiosity, indifference, irritation, recognition?
- Would I look closer, click, remember, take the meeting, invite for interview? Or move on?
- What sticks when I leave?
The reaction must mirror the archetype. If a persona doesn't get it, write that.
Phase 4: Framework Critique
Each dimension scored 1 to 5 with concrete justification. Weights shift by asset type.
4.1 Visual Hierarchy
Does the design lead the eye in the right order?
4.2 Dwell-Time Clarity
Is the core message graspable within the asset's expected dwell time? Poster 2-3 seconds, social ad less, CV 30-90 seconds, deck-hero-slide 10 seconds, LinkedIn post 3-5 seconds (first sentence).
4.3 AIDA (or Story Arc for decks and long-form)
Attention, Interest, Desire, Action. For decks: hook, problem, solution, proof, ask, close.
4.4 Message Clarity
One message or three? Headline and supporting elements aligned or fighting?
4.5 CTA Strength (where applicable)
Clear next step? Visible, unambiguous, fit to goal?
4.6 Premium Perception
Wertig genug für die Positionierung oder Rolle?
4.7 Brand or Identity Consistency
Passt es zur Brand oder zum candidate-Narrativ?
4.8 Limbic Resonance
Which emotional system does the asset address? Match the dominant system of the audience?
Phase 4b: Creative Expert Roundtable
After framework critique, apply two to three stylised expert lenses plus the neuromarketing lens. Full reference: references/expert-lens-principles.md.
Lens pool (twelve lenses across five families):
- Creative Directors / Advertising: David Ogilvy (headline, promise), Bill Bernbach (truth, self-irony), Mary Wells Lawrence (brand theatre), Stefan Sagmeister (emotional risk), Dave Trott (one thing, impact).
- Design & Typography: Paula Scher (type as identity, scale), Erik Spiekermann (type craft, hierarchy).
- Persuasion & Behavior: Robert Cialdini (six principles of influence), Phil Barden (System 1, cognitive fluency).
- Presentation & Storytelling: Nancy Duarte (story-arc, deck-resonance), Chip & Dan Heath (SUCCESs framework, stickiness).
- UX & Clarity: Steve Krug (don't-make-me-think, scanability).
Selection logic by asset type:
- Pitch deck: Duarte + Heath + Cialdini. Plus Barden. Optional Trott for "one thing" focus.
- Landing page: Krug + Ogilvy. Plus Barden. Optional Cialdini for conversion-focused pages.
- LinkedIn post or X thread: Cialdini + Trott + Heath. Plus Barden.
- Ad or poster: Scher + Spiekermann + Ogilvy. Plus Barden. Optional Sagmeister.
- CV or cover letter: Ogilvy + Spiekermann + Cialdini. Optional Heath for story angle.
- Brand identity work: Scher + Wells Lawrence + Bernbach. Optional Sagmeister.
- Email or newsletter: Ogilvy + Trott + Heath. Plus Barden.
Maximum three expert lenses plus Barden. More dilutes.
Format per lens: two sentences. Observation, then implication. No original quotes. "Viewed through Ogilvy's lens..." not "Ogilvy says".
Calibration note at the end of the roundtable: stylised lenses based on documented principles, not original voices.
Phase 5: A/B Comparison
Only if multiple variants. Otherwise skip.
- Run each through Phase 3, 4 and 4b.
- Direct comparison per dimension.
- Clear recommendation with justification.
- Hybrid solutions: specify which element from which variant.
Phase 6: Synthesis
Verdict
- Ship. Works.
- Ship with adjustments. Core right, defined fixes.
- Back to the drawing board. Fundamental issue.
Overall Score
Average plus archetype panel tendency. Honest.
Concrete Fixes
Prioritised. Problem plus solution.
What Works
Short list. Don't break what carries weight.
Phase 7: Output
## Pretest: [Asset] for [Brand or Candidate or Context]
**Verdict:** [Ship / With adjustments / Back to drawing board]
**Score:** [X.X / 5]
**Asset/Goal:** [Context in one line]
**Dominant emotional system of audience:** [Balance / Dominance / Stimulance]
### Archetype Panel
[Per persona: name, Limbic archetype, then 2 to 3 sentence first-person reaction]
### Framework Critique
[Per dimension 4.1 to 4.8: score + one sentence justification]
### Creative Expert Roundtable
[Two to three expert lenses plus Barden. Per lens two sentences: observation, then implication. End with calibration note.]
### A/B Recommendation
[Only with multiple variants: winner + why]
### Concrete Fixes
1. [Problem + solution]
2. ...
### What Works
[Short list]
Rules
- Don't sugarcoat.
- Cast archetypes honestly. At least one skeptical voice.
- Separate taste from function.
- Concrete over generic.
- Context beats rule.
- Derive Limbic archetypes from the audience segment.
- Never sell the Creative Expert Roundtable as original quotes. Stylised lenses, no ventriloquism.
Attribution
Limbic Model, Limbic Archetypes and DE distribution per Hans-Georg Häusel. Brain View (2014), Limbic Success (2018), Burda Typologie der Wünsche. Phil Barden, Decoded (2013). Expert lenses based on publicly published books and casework of Ogilvy, Bernbach, Wells Lawrence, Sagmeister, Trott, Scher, Spiekermann, Cialdini, Duarte, Heath, Krug. No fabricated quotes.
