ホーム / Skills / ブランド・マーケティング / A/B テストと実験(A/B Testing)
ブランド・マーケティング

A/B テストと実験(A/B Testing)

Corey HainesMITSkill の言語: 英語
ライセンス確認済みスクリプトなし低リスク
デモ実行記録 · claude-sonnet-5-5 · 2026年10月
Using the ab-testing skill, plan a test for the signup page headline of a fictional app. Baseline signup conversion is 4%, the page gets about 8,000 visitors a week, and we want to detect a 15% relative lift. Tell me whether we have enough traffic, how long to run it, and what to write down before we start.
Skill: ab-testing

Signup headline test plan

Do we have enough traffic?

Yes, but only just. At 8,000 visitors a week, a 15% relative lift is detectable in about 5 weeks.

Input Value
Baseline conversion 4.0%
Target (15% relative lift) 4.6% (+0.6 points absolute)
Significance / power 95% (two-sided) / 80%
Sample size about 18,000 visitors per variant, about 36,000 total

This uses the standard two-proportion formula. Check it against Evan Miller's calculator before launch. Expect small differences of a few hundred visitors.

How long to run it

  • 36,000 visitors at 8,000 a week is 4.5 weeks. Run it for 5 full weeks with a 50/50 split, which is about 40,000 visitors.
  • Use whole weeks so every weekday and weekend is represented equally.
  • Don't stop early, even if it looks significant at week 2. Peeking inflates false positives.
  • Don't extend it either if it's flat at week 5. Call it inconclusive.

Sensitivity to the lift you target:

Detectable lift Per variant Duration
20% relative (4.8%) about 10,300 about 3 weeks
15% relative (4.6%) about 18,000 about 5 weeks
10% relative (4.4%) about 39,500 about 10 weeks

Headline tests often produce lifts under 15%. If the true effect is 10%, this test will probably miss it, so you'd see "no significant difference" even though the headline helps. Only run it if a 15% lift is the smallest result worth acting on. If you want to detect smaller effects, test a bolder change than a wording tweak, such as a different value proposition rather than a rephrase.

Constraints:

  • Two variants only. An A/B/C test would need about 7 weeks.
  • Counting visitors. The 8,000 must be unique visitors who see the headline, not sessions or page views. If it's sessions, the test will take longer.

What to write down before starting

  1. Hypothesis, in the skill's format: Because [evidence, e.g. session recordings, survey responses, or ad-to-page message mismatch], we believe [new headline] will cause [higher signup conversion] for [new visitors to the signup page]. We'll know this is true when conversion rises from 4.0% to at least 4.6% at 95% confidence. Without real evidence in the "because" clause, you're guessing.
  2. Variants. Screenshots of control and variant, with the exact copy. Change only the headline.
  3. Primary metric. Unique visitor to completed signup, with a precise definition of "completed" (submitted form or verified email). Decide this now.
  4. Secondary metrics. Signup-form start rate, scroll depth, and time on page. These help explain why it worked or didn't.
  5. Guardrail metrics. Activation or week-1 retention of signups, and bounce rate. A headline that over-promises can lift signups and attract low-quality users. Define the stop rule: halt if a guardrail is significantly negative.
  6. Test parameters.
    • Sample size per variant (about 18,000), power, alpha, and the MDE (15% relative).
    • Fixed end date, about 5 weeks out.
    • 50/50 split with persistent assignment, so returning visitors see the same variant.
    • Population, including whether to exclude internal and bot traffic.
  7. Decision rules.
    • Ship if the variant is significant and positive with no guardrail harm.
    • Keep control if it's significant and negative.
    • If it's flat, treat it as inconclusive, not as evidence of no effect.
    • Note which segments you'll look at (device, new vs. returning, traffic source). Fix these now to avoid cherry-picking later.
  8. Implementation notes.
    • Server-side or client-side. Client-side can flicker on a headline, so prefer server-side or an anti-flicker setup.
    • Tracking verified on both variants.
    • A sample ratio mismatch (SRM) check planned. The split should land close to 50/50.
  9. Risks and external factors. Planned campaigns, launches, seasonality, or traffic-source changes during the 5 weeks. Log anything that happens. Avoid adding new traffic sources mid-test.
  10. Pre-launch QA. Check both variants on mobile and desktop, and confirm events fire.

When it finishes, record the outcome in the playbook format: result with CI and p-value, guardrails, segment deltas, the reusable pattern, and status.

If you give me the actual control headline and candidate variant, I can draft the hypothesis and a few evidence-based headline options.

Real run in an isolated folder with only this skill installed. Only the Skill and Read tools were enabled, so nothing was fetched from the web and no file was written. The example is fictional. The traffic numbers are invented.

できること

信頼できる実験の設計を支援します。仮説のテンプレート(「X だから、Y が対象 W に Z をもたらすと考える。指標 M が動けば正しいと分かる」)、テストの種類(A/B、A/B/n、多変量、URL 分割)、ベースラインと期待する改善幅ごとのサンプルサイズ早見表、主指標・副指標・ガードレール指標、何を変えるか、トラフィックの配分、クライアント側とサーバー側の実装、公開前チェックリスト、「途中で見る」問題、結果の読み方つきの分析チェックリストを扱います。後半では、単発のテストを運用の仕組みにします。実験のサイクル、ICE による優先順位づけ、実験の速度目標、プレイブックの記入テンプレート、毎週・隔週・毎月・四半期ごとの進め方です。参考ファイルは、テストのテンプレートとサンプルサイズのガイドです。

動き方

  1. ベースラインの転換率、トラフィック、変更内容、検出したい最小の改善幅を尋ねます。
  2. トラフィックが足りるかを確認し、必要な期間を見積もります。
  3. 仮説、指標、開始前に記録すべき内容を書きます。

向いている場面

変更が本当に良いかを判断したい人、定常的に実験する習慣をつくりたいチーム。

補足とリスク

低リスク:スクリプトのない指示のみのパッケージで、ネットワーク接続やファイル書き込みはありません。サンプルサイズの数値や運用の目標(月 4〜8 件の実験、勝率 20〜30% など)は経験則なので、実際の判断には適切な計算ツールを使ってください(Skill に公開ツールへのリンクが 2 つあります)。テストを実行したり分析データを読んだりはしないため、実際のテストの結果は分かりません。一部のリンクは、このパッケージに含まれない姉妹 Skill やツールのガイドを指しています。架空のトラフィック数値で 1 回試用しました。