Introduction
During the last few years, the field of consumer research has been experiencing dramatic changes, such as the incorporation of neuroimaging as a tool for conducting research regarding marketing relevant problems (Ambler et al., 2000). This major change gave birth to an entirely new and eye-catching field of study in marketing sciences called ‘neuromarketing’. Neuromarketing is defined by Lee et al. (2007, 200) as “the application of neuroscientific methods to analyze and understand human behaviour in relation to markets and marketing exchanges.”
Although the implementation of neurobiological methods in consumer research is not recent, the direct study of the reactions occurring in the consumers’ brains is. An entirely different perspective of the processes within the human brain is now becoming available through the application of functional magnetic resonance tomography (Plassmann et al., 2007 as cited in Hubert and Kenning, 2008). The discovery of neuroscience by marketing research has opened a new chapter in the history of consumer research, particularly in the area of advertising research. It is suggested that neuroscience is able to help managers to ameliorate the effectiveness of advertising, by facilitating an understanding on how advertising stimuli is received and memorized by the brain, and how these stimuli might influence brand selection in the future (Ambler et al., 2000).
This paper is divided in five main sections. The first section provides an overview of the new research field of neuromarketing, including the introduction of essential concept such as neuroscience, crucial brain imaging methods, and neuromarketing’s precursor, neuroeconomics. Subsequently, the current status of neuromarketing and advertising research will be presented independently from each other. This part will be followed by the introduction of the novel cooperation between these two independent disciplines. Finally, an outlook will be given with regard to the role of neuromarketing within the area of advertsing research in the future.
The Conceptual Framework of Neuromarketing
Neuromarketing can be regarded as the point of intersection between the two disciplines consumer behaviour and neuroscience. Even though these fields of study evolved independently substantial streams of research, the combination of both offers numerous research opportunities (Garcia and Saad, 2008). Consumer behaviour on the one hand “reflects the totality of consumers’ decisions with respect to the acquisition, consumption, and disposition of goods, services, activities, and ideas by (human) decision-making units [over time]“ (Jacob Jacoby, 1976 as cited in Hoyer and MacInnis, 2007). The field of neuroscience on the other hand explores the structure and the activity of the human brain. More precisely, it seeks to understand how the environment is encoded and represented, how the body is controlled, and how certain brain states induce behavioural states. This understanding will result in a better comprehension of the nexus between stimulus and response (Perrachione and Perrachione, 2008). Insights are generated through the application of modern neuroimaging technology, which “allows researchers to observe how detailed neural mechanisms cultivate subsequent behaviour” (Garcia and Saad, 2008, 399)
Neuroscience studies the neural processes which form sophisticated thoughts, as for instance “reasoning, decision making, object representation, emotion, and memory, which overlap with marketing notions such as positioning, hierarchy of effects, brand loyalty, and consumer responses to marketing” (Pe
rrachione and Perrachione, 2008, 304). A co-operation between marketing researchers and neuroscientists might lead to insightful research, provided that marketing academics and practitioners learn “to think like neuroscientists, especially in learning to ask the sorts of questions that will entice neuroscientists to collaborate: questions about the structure and function of the brain” (Perrachione and Perrachione, 2008, 315).
But neuromarketing is not the only discipline which resulted from the merger of neuroscience and social science. When focussing on business-related fields of study, neuroeconomics is suggested to be the discipline which has included neuroimaging techniques as research tools the most intensively (Garcia and Saad, 2008). Neuroeconomics is defined by Kenning and Plassmann (2005, 344) as “the application of neuroscientific methods to analyze and understand economically relevant behaviour.”
The most frequently applied brain imaging tool in neuromarketing is functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). This technique is considered to be the most promising tool for generating neurological images seeking to clarify essential marketing research questions (Kenning et al., 2007), even though it is “far from ideal when performing marketing research” (Fugate, 2007, 287). Nevertheless, fMRI offers at this point the most accurate physical evidence of how information related to buying decisions is processed in the brain (Fugate, 2007)
FMRI technique makes it possible to observe neural functions, for increased activity of particular regions of the brain is accompanied by changes of the blood flow in the brain (Frackowiak et al., 2004 as cited in Kenning et al., 2007). This brain imaging method offers the advantage of facilitating entire cerebral scans in not more that three seconds, in a non-invasive procedure, allowing several repeated measurements (Kenning et al., 2007).
It is important to bear in mind that due to the fact that neuromarketing is a relatively young field of study, its theoretical, practical and empirical framework is still being continuously elaborated and expanded (Garcia and Saad, 2008), and that several research aspects “are still in their infancy and basic research is necessary to facilitate an application of these techniques to marketing” (Kenning et al., 2007). However, neuromarketing is considered to have great potential to minimize failures, as well as increase the number of successes in the area of marketing, in spite of the fact that it generates at the same time considerable controversy (Fugate, 2007) and presents major limitations.
As any new rising discipline, neuromarketing faces several challenges and limitations, some of which will be presented hereafter. First, neuromarketing relies on brain imaging technology, which is as opposed to traditional behavioural marketing research, an extremely cost intensive research tool (Perrachione and Perrachione, 2008). Due to the sophistication of the implemented tools, the interpretation of the brain imaging data is way more complicated than data resulting from questionnaires or behavioural measurements (Kenning et al., 2007). Furthermore, Kenning et al. (2007, 147) note that the “perceived richness of real-world marketing stimuli” is limited by the scientific context in which the research is conducted. A further limitation of neuromarketing is the validity of the research results. Because neuroimaging methods are very expensive, the amount of participants of the respective studies is generally quite low. Due to the small sample size, the probability of including false positives and committing type II errors is high (Tversky and Kahneman, 1971 as cited in Hubert and Kenning, 2008). Finally, it is necessary to point out the ethical consequences of this new research discipline. Kenning et al. (2007, 147) claim that “there is the danger that the public might ignore the neurobiological and technical restrictions and treat initial results as the indisputable truth.” It is a matter of fact that currently it is not possible to interpret neuroimaging data with the purpose to “use it as a post hoc description” (Perrachione and Perrachione, 2008, 313) of the emotions and the thoughts of consumers.
Neuromarketing Today
Academic research literature clearly shows that marketing academics and practitioners are excited and agree about the fact that neuroscientific methods are able to make considerable contributions to the comprehension of the behaviour of consumers regarding marketing relevant issues (Lee et al., 2007). Lee et al. (2007, 203) consider neuromarketing as “a valid field of study, and a rich source of problems to be investigated using insight from neuroimaging”.
Worldwide, there are more that 90 neuromarketing agencies seeking to understand how consumers unconsciously see brands and their advertisements (Lovell, 2008). These agencies, as well as marketing academics are using neuromarketing to answer crucial marketing questions. For instance, they have been investigating the effectiveness and impact of advertising and advertising media, the importance of colours and smells of products, as well as the appeal of product design and brands, amongst many other marketing relevant issues (Kenning et al., 2007).
Even though neuroimaging provides valuable insights into the way humans perceive and process marketing stimuli, “most social sciences have yet to adopt neuroimaging as a standard tool or procedure for research” (Lee et al., 2007, 199). The underlying causes of the slow reception of neuroimaging technology in marketing sciences is considered to be on the one hand, the fact that the subject itself might be regarded as intimidating, and on the other hand, that for some academics, this type of sophisticated, expensive methodology is simply not attainable (Lee et al., 2007).
Advertising Research Today
For many years, marketing practitioners and academics have both been trying to find out how advertising works. Advertising is “any paid form of non-personal presentation and promotion of ideas, goods or services by an identified sponsor” (Kotler et at., 2005, 761). As the Internet has considerably changed the advertising landscape in the last decade, offering companies possibilities to market their products differently than traditional advertising (O’Connor, 2001), it is considered important to look more closely on online advertising. Online advertising is similar to traditional advertising, only that it enables the implementation of “more colourful and graphical format than a standard advertisement” (O’Connor, 2001, 27). Banner advertisements can additionally be interactive, and are becoming due to fast technology development increasingly creative and rich. In terms of consumer involvement, online advertising provides the consumer more control compared to traditional ads, where viewers adopt a more passive attitude, and adverts are imposed on them (Harris and Dennis, 2008).
Advertising in the twenty-first century is characterized by increasing message competition and ineffectiveness. According to Salomon et al. (2006), “there’s no doubt that a lot of advertising is ineffective.” Therefore, it is essential for companies to assess the effectiveness of their advertising activities, in order to increase the impact of their communication messages (Salomon et al., 2006). New advertising campaigns are traditionally tested by conducting research on the response of consumers on advertising messages by using conventional forms of marketing research, such as interviews, focus groups (Fugate, 2007), aided and unaided recall, as well as attitudinal measures (Salomon et al., 2006).
However, findings of traditional advertising research rely heavily on self-assessment measures, which depend entirely “on the ability and willingness of the respondent to accurately report their attitudes and/or prior behaviours” (Petty and Cacioppo, 1983, as cited in Lee et al., 2007, 200). Furthermore, self-assessment methods are characterized by providing a subjective description of the thoughts and feelings of the respondents, as well as being biased, for “(m)any effects in the human organism that influence behaviour are not perceived consciously; hence, the cognitive filter of the test taker may bias the results” (Hubert and Kenning, 2008, 273). In addition, it is considered improbable that even the most resolute respondents possess the ability to precisely formulate their subconscious motives (Britt, 2004 as cited in Fugate, 2007). It is also noted, that consumers participating in research groups frequently say what they think the researchers want to hear from them or deliberately give false statements (Walton, 2004, as cited in Fugate, 2007). All the above can make the findings of advertising research less insightful, or even useless.
Linking Neuromarketing and Advertising Research
The attention of advertising researchers has been captured by the virtues of neuroscience, in the hope that this tool will support their investigation activities in the future. And even though neuroscience has just recently been discovered by marketing research, several findings resulting from its implementation have already been integrated into existing advertising models (Marci, 2008). However, Merci (2008, 474) argues that “advertising researchers and advertisers have a long way to go scientifically in order to bridge the gap between existing methodologies and a fully neuroscientifically informed framework for diagnosing emotional responses to and measuring the effectiveness of advertising”.
Nevertheless, down to the present day, several studies have used neuroscientific methods to answer important advertising related questions (Merci, 2008). Academics hold the opinion that neuroscience can assist at overcoming the prevailing lack of theory within marketing communications, and explore how the brain processes
and memorizes communication stimuli (Hubert and Kenning, 2008). Before neuroscience was incorporated into advertising research, most consumer behaviour rested upon inference (Fugate, 2007). Neuroscience eliminates the limitations found in self-assessment methods implemented in advertsing research, for “participating subjects have little to no influence on the measurement of their brain activity” (Hubert and Kenning, 2008, 273).
The latest findings resulting from the application of neuroscience in advertising research suggest that “different aspects or types of advertising generate significantly different types of brain activity, possibly leading to differences in recall and/or other measures of ad effectiveness” (Lee et al., 2007). Findings like the above might help to develop new research theory, which again could ameliorate marketers’ communication measures. Companies could consequently implement superior marketing programmes able to satisfy the subconscious and emotional needs of their consumers (Hubert and Kenning, 2008).
Due to the fact that consumer neuroscience is a new field of research, it is suggested not to consider it as a threat to traditional consumer research (Hubert and Kenning, 2008). Even though fMRI technique facilitates a better understanding of consumers’ brains, it is still relatively rarely implemented in advertsing research (Kenning, 2008), and hence it should be considered at the moment only as a complementing research tool (Hubert and Kenning, 2008).
Findings and Implications
Neuromarketing has contributed to important insights within advertising research with respect to rational and emotional thinking. It has demonstrated by using fMRI techniques, that marketing stimuli leads to rational as well as emotional responses in the brain of the consumers, meaning that both responses interact and “co-exist, in fact, are co-dependent” (Fugate, 2007, 386). In this respect, the opinion of marketing academics and practitioners clearly differed in the past. While academics regarded the processing of advertising as a cognitive mechanism, practitioners believed that the effect of advertising was primarily driven by how well a particular advert could induce emotional responses (Ambler et al., 2000).
Furthermore, it was discovered that emotions play a decisive part in the perception and attention process, as well as the formation of memory. Hence it is suggested that in spite of “calls for more informative advertising, marketers and advertisers would do well to continue to attend to the emotional responses of consumers to their products in order to optimize value delivery” (Perrachione and Perrachione, 2008, 313).
Further discoveries were made related to the importance of the attractiveness of an advertisement, and to the way facial expressions convey emotions. Attractive ads led to neural activity in areas of the brain linked with emotions in the process of decision-making and senses of rewards. Therefore, ads rated as attractive can function as rewarding stimulus (Hubert and Kenning, 2008). In terms of facial expressions, Ambler et al. (2000, 20) discovered that these “were more positively correlated with recall than was conventional copy testing,” and that ads were better memorized when they were associated with emotional images, as opposed to solely rational statements.
The article ‘Neuromarketing: brain scam or valuable tool?’ (2005) presents interesting findings regarding the effectiveness of different advertising media. Outdoor and press adverts were found to be extremely effective when customers were already aware of a particular stimuli included in the ad, whereas television adverts were advantageous in promoting emotions and long-term memories, both crucial for the establishment of brand perceptions. Radio was considered useful when processing low interest information. This information was used to develop a planning tool, which determines which areas of the brain need to be stimulated in order to communicate a message effectively, and then selects the most appropriate media options for that objective.
Neuromarketing and Advertising Research in the Future
Neuroscience offers to researchers the possibility of testing and further developing existing marketing and advertising theory (Kenning, 2008), provided that a strong scientific attitude is adopted (Perrachione and Perrachione, 2008). Furthermore, it is necessary to validate and expand the outcomes of neuroscientific studies (Hubert and Kenning, 2008), as well as conduct more transdisciplinary research (Kenning, 2008). It is essential to point out that several of the major issues of advertising research have yet to be assigned to a certain region of the human brain (Perrachione and Perrachione, 2008). Hence, fMRI technology will not be available for advertisers for routine examinations. However, “important key areas can already be explored theoretically” (Kenning et al., 2007, 147). The enthusiasm of researchers about consumer neuroscience is based on the supplementary value and insights that result from this technique. Marci (2008, 475) argues “that the gap between neuroscience and advertising is closing”, and that neuroscience will be increasingly implemented by advertisers in the future.
Neuroscience opens the door for a myriad of further research opportunities, some of which will be briefly introduced subsequently. First, brain imaging technique should be applied to revise and rectify traditional consumer behaviour theory (Fugate, 2007), and to ameliorate the communication between organizations and the target audience (Hubert and Kenning, 2008). Secondly, it should be explored how a particular target audience scans advertising copy and images posted on the Internet (Reynolds, 2006, as cited in Fugate, 2007). Thirdly, advocators of the brain imaging method argue that the effectiveness of advertising could further be tested. Volunteers “could be wired to imaging devices while viewing images or video clips a new promotional campaign. Depending on which areas of the brain “light” up, assumptions can be made about the subject’s unconscious thought patterns” (Fugate, 2007, 387). Fourthly, it can be studied in more detail, which advertising elements are essential to create awareness, attitudes and judgements of brands and if there are great differences between various groups. Furthermore, it could be explored if certain elements trigger undesirable negative effects, as for instance overconsumption (Lee et al., 2007). Lastly, neuroscience could help to provide information regarding the encoding of behaviour presented by actors in ads, and help to measure how effective a particular endorser or spokesperson is (Perrachione and Perrachione, 2008).
Conclusion
There is no doubt about the fact that neuromarketing has captured the attention of marketing and advertising practitioners and academics, and that this field of study will continue to be developed and increasingly implemented, in order to improve and expand both marketing theory and practical knowledge. Initial studies have shown that brain imaging tools can be used in consumer and advertising research, to help to prevent marketing failures and make the communication between organizations and their target audience more effective, even though further research is yet necessary and absolutely indispensable. One important contribution of neuroscience to marketing and advertising research was the understanding of emotions, and the important role they play in shaping unconscious decision-making processes of no longer merely rational consumers. Neuromarketing, supported by neuroscientific measurements, has the potential to provide marketers and advertisers in the long rung with more objective research results, as well as novel insights into the neural processes that might lead to specific consumer behaviour.
Images:
I) www.sciencedaily.com; II) www.ucla.edu/alzheimer/images
References
Ambler, T., Ioannides, A., Rose, S. (2000), ‘Brands on the Brain: Neuro-Images of Advertising, Business Strategy Review, Vol. 11, Issue 3, pp. 17-30
Fugate, D. (2007), ‘Neuromarketing: a layman’s look at neuroscience and its potential application to marketing practice’, Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 24, Issue 7, pp. 385–394
Garcia, J., Saad, G. (2008), ‘Evolutionary neuromarketing: Darwinizing the neuroimaging paradigm for consumer behavior’, Journal of Consumer Behaviour, Vol. 7, pp. 397–414
Harris, L., Dennis, C. (2008), Marketing the e-Business, 2nd edition, New York, Routledge
Hoyer, W.D., MacInnis, D.J. (2007), Consumer Behaviour, 4th edition, Bostin, New York, Houghton Mifflin Company
Hubert, M., Kenning, P. (2008), ‘A current overview of consumer neuroscience’, Journal of Consumer Behaviour, Vol. 7, pp. 272–292
Kenning, P. (2008), ‘What advertisers can do and cannot do with neuroscience’, International Journal of Advertising, Advertising & the Brain Special Issue, Vol. 27, Issue 3, pp. 472-473
Kenning, P., Plassmann, H. (2005), ‘NeuroEconomics: An overview from an economic perspective’, Brain Research Bulletin, Vol. 67, pp. 343–35
Kenning, P., Plassmann, H., Ahlert, D. (2007), ‘Applications of functional magnetic resonance imaging for market research’, Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal, Vol. 10, No. 2, pp. 135-152
Kotler, P., Wong, V., Saunders, J., Armstrong, G. (2005), Principles of marketing, 4th European edition, Harlow, Financial Times Prentice Hall
Lee, N., Broderick, A., Chamberlain, L. (2007), ‘What is ‘neuromarketing’? A discussion and agenda for future research’, International Journal of Psychophysiology, Vol. 63, pp. 199–204
Lovell, C. (2008), ‘Is neuroscience making a difference?’, Campaign, 3 October 2008, p. 11
Marci, C.D. (2008), ‘Minding the gap: the evolving relationships between affective neuroscience and advertising research’, International Journal of Advertising, Advertising & the Brain Special Issue, Vol. 27, Issue 3, pp. 473-475
‘Neuromarketing: brain scam or valuable tool?’ (February 3 2005), Marketing Week, pp.22-23
O’Connor, J. (2001), Marketing in the digital age, 2nd edition, Essex, Pearson Education Limited
Perrachione, T. K., Perrachione, J.R. (2008), ‘Brains and brands: Developing mutually informative research in neuroscience and marketing’, Journal of Consumer Behaviour, Vol. 7, pp. 303–318
Solomon, M. Marshall, G., Stuart, E. (2006), Marketing: real people, real choices, Upper Saddle River, N.J. Pearson Education
During the last few years, the field of consumer research has been experiencing dramatic changes, such as the incorporation of neuroimaging as a tool for conducting research regarding marketing relevant problems (Ambler et al., 2000). This major change gave birth to an entirely new and eye-catching field of study in marketing sciences called ‘neuromarketing’. Neuromarketing is defined by Lee et al. (2007, 200) as “the application of neuroscientific methods to analyze and understand human behaviour in relation to markets and marketing exchanges.”
Although the implementation of neurobiological methods in consumer research is not recent, the direct study of the reactions occurring in the consumers’ brains is. An entirely different perspective of the processes within the human brain is now becoming available through the application of functional magnetic resonance tomography (Plassmann et al., 2007 as cited in Hubert and Kenning, 2008). The discovery of neuroscience by marketing research has opened a new chapter in the history of consumer research, particularly in the area of advertising research. It is suggested that neuroscience is able to help managers to ameliorate the effectiveness of advertising, by facilitating an understanding on how advertising stimuli is received and memorized by the brain, and how these stimuli might influence brand selection in the future (Ambler et al., 2000).
This paper is divided in five main sections. The first section provides an overview of the new research field of neuromarketing, including the introduction of essential concept such as neuroscience, crucial brain imaging methods, and neuromarketing’s precursor, neuroeconomics. Subsequently, the current status of neuromarketing and advertising research will be presented independently from each other. This part will be followed by the introduction of the novel cooperation between these two independent disciplines. Finally, an outlook will be given with regard to the role of neuromarketing within the area of advertsing research in the future.
The Conceptual Framework of Neuromarketing
Neuromarketing can be regarded as the point of intersection between the two disciplines consumer behaviour and neuroscience. Even though these fields of study evolved independently substantial streams of research, the combination of both offers numerous research opportunities (Garcia and Saad, 2008). Consumer behaviour on the one hand “reflects the totality of consumers’ decisions with respect to the acquisition, consumption, and disposition of goods, services, activities, and ideas by (human) decision-making units [over time]“ (Jacob Jacoby, 1976 as cited in Hoyer and MacInnis, 2007). The field of neuroscience on the other hand explores the structure and the activity of the human brain. More precisely, it seeks to understand how the environment is encoded and represented, how the body is controlled, and how certain brain states induce behavioural states. This understanding will result in a better comprehension of the nexus between stimulus and response (Perrachione and Perrachione, 2008). Insights are generated through the application of modern neuroimaging technology, which “allows researchers to observe how detailed neural mechanisms cultivate subsequent behaviour” (Garcia and Saad, 2008, 399)
Neuroscience studies the neural processes which form sophisticated thoughts, as for instance “reasoning, decision making, object representation, emotion, and memory, which overlap with marketing notions such as positioning, hierarchy of effects, brand loyalty, and consumer responses to marketing” (Pe
rrachione and Perrachione, 2008, 304). A co-operation between marketing researchers and neuroscientists might lead to insightful research, provided that marketing academics and practitioners learn “to think like neuroscientists, especially in learning to ask the sorts of questions that will entice neuroscientists to collaborate: questions about the structure and function of the brain” (Perrachione and Perrachione, 2008, 315).But neuromarketing is not the only discipline which resulted from the merger of neuroscience and social science. When focussing on business-related fields of study, neuroeconomics is suggested to be the discipline which has included neuroimaging techniques as research tools the most intensively (Garcia and Saad, 2008). Neuroeconomics is defined by Kenning and Plassmann (2005, 344) as “the application of neuroscientific methods to analyze and understand economically relevant behaviour.”
The most frequently applied brain imaging tool in neuromarketing is functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). This technique is considered to be the most promising tool for generating neurological images seeking to clarify essential marketing research questions (Kenning et al., 2007), even though it is “far from ideal when performing marketing research” (Fugate, 2007, 287). Nevertheless, fMRI offers at this point the most accurate physical evidence of how information related to buying decisions is processed in the brain (Fugate, 2007)
FMRI technique makes it possible to observe neural functions, for increased activity of particular regions of the brain is accompanied by changes of the blood flow in the brain (Frackowiak et al., 2004 as cited in Kenning et al., 2007). This brain imaging method offers the advantage of facilitating entire cerebral scans in not more that three seconds, in a non-invasive procedure, allowing several repeated measurements (Kenning et al., 2007).
It is important to bear in mind that due to the fact that neuromarketing is a relatively young field of study, its theoretical, practical and empirical framework is still being continuously elaborated and expanded (Garcia and Saad, 2008), and that several research aspects “are still in their infancy and basic research is necessary to facilitate an application of these techniques to marketing” (Kenning et al., 2007). However, neuromarketing is considered to have great potential to minimize failures, as well as increase the number of successes in the area of marketing, in spite of the fact that it generates at the same time considerable controversy (Fugate, 2007) and presents major limitations.
As any new rising discipline, neuromarketing faces several challenges and limitations, some of which will be presented hereafter. First, neuromarketing relies on brain imaging technology, which is as opposed to traditional behavioural marketing research, an extremely cost intensive research tool (Perrachione and Perrachione, 2008). Due to the sophistication of the implemented tools, the interpretation of the brain imaging data is way more complicated than data resulting from questionnaires or behavioural measurements (Kenning et al., 2007). Furthermore, Kenning et al. (2007, 147) note that the “perceived richness of real-world marketing stimuli” is limited by the scientific context in which the research is conducted. A further limitation of neuromarketing is the validity of the research results. Because neuroimaging methods are very expensive, the amount of participants of the respective studies is generally quite low. Due to the small sample size, the probability of including false positives and committing type II errors is high (Tversky and Kahneman, 1971 as cited in Hubert and Kenning, 2008). Finally, it is necessary to point out the ethical consequences of this new research discipline. Kenning et al. (2007, 147) claim that “there is the danger that the public might ignore the neurobiological and technical restrictions and treat initial results as the indisputable truth.” It is a matter of fact that currently it is not possible to interpret neuroimaging data with the purpose to “use it as a post hoc description” (Perrachione and Perrachione, 2008, 313) of the emotions and the thoughts of consumers.
Neuromarketing Today
Academic research literature clearly shows that marketing academics and practitioners are excited and agree about the fact that neuroscientific methods are able to make considerable contributions to the comprehension of the behaviour of consumers regarding marketing relevant issues (Lee et al., 2007). Lee et al. (2007, 203) consider neuromarketing as “a valid field of study, and a rich source of problems to be investigated using insight from neuroimaging”.
Worldwide, there are more that 90 neuromarketing agencies seeking to understand how consumers unconsciously see brands and their advertisements (Lovell, 2008). These agencies, as well as marketing academics are using neuromarketing to answer crucial marketing questions. For instance, they have been investigating the effectiveness and impact of advertising and advertising media, the importance of colours and smells of products, as well as the appeal of product design and brands, amongst many other marketing relevant issues (Kenning et al., 2007).
Even though neuroimaging provides valuable insights into the way humans perceive and process marketing stimuli, “most social sciences have yet to adopt neuroimaging as a standard tool or procedure for research” (Lee et al., 2007, 199). The underlying causes of the slow reception of neuroimaging technology in marketing sciences is considered to be on the one hand, the fact that the subject itself might be regarded as intimidating, and on the other hand, that for some academics, this type of sophisticated, expensive methodology is simply not attainable (Lee et al., 2007).
Advertising Research Today
For many years, marketing practitioners and academics have both been trying to find out how advertising works. Advertising is “any paid form of non-personal presentation and promotion of ideas, goods or services by an identified sponsor” (Kotler et at., 2005, 761). As the Internet has considerably changed the advertising landscape in the last decade, offering companies possibilities to market their products differently than traditional advertising (O’Connor, 2001), it is considered important to look more closely on online advertising. Online advertising is similar to traditional advertising, only that it enables the implementation of “more colourful and graphical format than a standard advertisement” (O’Connor, 2001, 27). Banner advertisements can additionally be interactive, and are becoming due to fast technology development increasingly creative and rich. In terms of consumer involvement, online advertising provides the consumer more control compared to traditional ads, where viewers adopt a more passive attitude, and adverts are imposed on them (Harris and Dennis, 2008).
Advertising in the twenty-first century is characterized by increasing message competition and ineffectiveness. According to Salomon et al. (2006), “there’s no doubt that a lot of advertising is ineffective.” Therefore, it is essential for companies to assess the effectiveness of their advertising activities, in order to increase the impact of their communication messages (Salomon et al., 2006). New advertising campaigns are traditionally tested by conducting research on the response of consumers on advertising messages by using conventional forms of marketing research, such as interviews, focus groups (Fugate, 2007), aided and unaided recall, as well as attitudinal measures (Salomon et al., 2006).
However, findings of traditional advertising research rely heavily on self-assessment measures, which depend entirely “on the ability and willingness of the respondent to accurately report their attitudes and/or prior behaviours” (Petty and Cacioppo, 1983, as cited in Lee et al., 2007, 200). Furthermore, self-assessment methods are characterized by providing a subjective description of the thoughts and feelings of the respondents, as well as being biased, for “(m)any effects in the human organism that influence behaviour are not perceived consciously; hence, the cognitive filter of the test taker may bias the results” (Hubert and Kenning, 2008, 273). In addition, it is considered improbable that even the most resolute respondents possess the ability to precisely formulate their subconscious motives (Britt, 2004 as cited in Fugate, 2007). It is also noted, that consumers participating in research groups frequently say what they think the researchers want to hear from them or deliberately give false statements (Walton, 2004, as cited in Fugate, 2007). All the above can make the findings of advertising research less insightful, or even useless.
Linking Neuromarketing and Advertising Research
The attention of advertising researchers has been captured by the virtues of neuroscience, in the hope that this tool will support their investigation activities in the future. And even though neuroscience has just recently been discovered by marketing research, several findings resulting from its implementation have already been integrated into existing advertising models (Marci, 2008). However, Merci (2008, 474) argues that “advertising researchers and advertisers have a long way to go scientifically in order to bridge the gap between existing methodologies and a fully neuroscientifically informed framework for diagnosing emotional responses to and measuring the effectiveness of advertising”.
Nevertheless, down to the present day, several studies have used neuroscientific methods to answer important advertising related questions (Merci, 2008). Academics hold the opinion that neuroscience can assist at overcoming the prevailing lack of theory within marketing communications, and explore how the brain processes
and memorizes communication stimuli (Hubert and Kenning, 2008). Before neuroscience was incorporated into advertising research, most consumer behaviour rested upon inference (Fugate, 2007). Neuroscience eliminates the limitations found in self-assessment methods implemented in advertsing research, for “participating subjects have little to no influence on the measurement of their brain activity” (Hubert and Kenning, 2008, 273).The latest findings resulting from the application of neuroscience in advertising research suggest that “different aspects or types of advertising generate significantly different types of brain activity, possibly leading to differences in recall and/or other measures of ad effectiveness” (Lee et al., 2007). Findings like the above might help to develop new research theory, which again could ameliorate marketers’ communication measures. Companies could consequently implement superior marketing programmes able to satisfy the subconscious and emotional needs of their consumers (Hubert and Kenning, 2008).
Due to the fact that consumer neuroscience is a new field of research, it is suggested not to consider it as a threat to traditional consumer research (Hubert and Kenning, 2008). Even though fMRI technique facilitates a better understanding of consumers’ brains, it is still relatively rarely implemented in advertsing research (Kenning, 2008), and hence it should be considered at the moment only as a complementing research tool (Hubert and Kenning, 2008).
Findings and Implications
Neuromarketing has contributed to important insights within advertising research with respect to rational and emotional thinking. It has demonstrated by using fMRI techniques, that marketing stimuli leads to rational as well as emotional responses in the brain of the consumers, meaning that both responses interact and “co-exist, in fact, are co-dependent” (Fugate, 2007, 386). In this respect, the opinion of marketing academics and practitioners clearly differed in the past. While academics regarded the processing of advertising as a cognitive mechanism, practitioners believed that the effect of advertising was primarily driven by how well a particular advert could induce emotional responses (Ambler et al., 2000).
Furthermore, it was discovered that emotions play a decisive part in the perception and attention process, as well as the formation of memory. Hence it is suggested that in spite of “calls for more informative advertising, marketers and advertisers would do well to continue to attend to the emotional responses of consumers to their products in order to optimize value delivery” (Perrachione and Perrachione, 2008, 313).
Further discoveries were made related to the importance of the attractiveness of an advertisement, and to the way facial expressions convey emotions. Attractive ads led to neural activity in areas of the brain linked with emotions in the process of decision-making and senses of rewards. Therefore, ads rated as attractive can function as rewarding stimulus (Hubert and Kenning, 2008). In terms of facial expressions, Ambler et al. (2000, 20) discovered that these “were more positively correlated with recall than was conventional copy testing,” and that ads were better memorized when they were associated with emotional images, as opposed to solely rational statements.
The article ‘Neuromarketing: brain scam or valuable tool?’ (2005) presents interesting findings regarding the effectiveness of different advertising media. Outdoor and press adverts were found to be extremely effective when customers were already aware of a particular stimuli included in the ad, whereas television adverts were advantageous in promoting emotions and long-term memories, both crucial for the establishment of brand perceptions. Radio was considered useful when processing low interest information. This information was used to develop a planning tool, which determines which areas of the brain need to be stimulated in order to communicate a message effectively, and then selects the most appropriate media options for that objective.
Neuromarketing and Advertising Research in the Future
Neuroscience offers to researchers the possibility of testing and further developing existing marketing and advertising theory (Kenning, 2008), provided that a strong scientific attitude is adopted (Perrachione and Perrachione, 2008). Furthermore, it is necessary to validate and expand the outcomes of neuroscientific studies (Hubert and Kenning, 2008), as well as conduct more transdisciplinary research (Kenning, 2008). It is essential to point out that several of the major issues of advertising research have yet to be assigned to a certain region of the human brain (Perrachione and Perrachione, 2008). Hence, fMRI technology will not be available for advertisers for routine examinations. However, “important key areas can already be explored theoretically” (Kenning et al., 2007, 147). The enthusiasm of researchers about consumer neuroscience is based on the supplementary value and insights that result from this technique. Marci (2008, 475) argues “that the gap between neuroscience and advertising is closing”, and that neuroscience will be increasingly implemented by advertisers in the future.
Neuroscience opens the door for a myriad of further research opportunities, some of which will be briefly introduced subsequently. First, brain imaging technique should be applied to revise and rectify traditional consumer behaviour theory (Fugate, 2007), and to ameliorate the communication between organizations and the target audience (Hubert and Kenning, 2008). Secondly, it should be explored how a particular target audience scans advertising copy and images posted on the Internet (Reynolds, 2006, as cited in Fugate, 2007). Thirdly, advocators of the brain imaging method argue that the effectiveness of advertising could further be tested. Volunteers “could be wired to imaging devices while viewing images or video clips a new promotional campaign. Depending on which areas of the brain “light” up, assumptions can be made about the subject’s unconscious thought patterns” (Fugate, 2007, 387). Fourthly, it can be studied in more detail, which advertising elements are essential to create awareness, attitudes and judgements of brands and if there are great differences between various groups. Furthermore, it could be explored if certain elements trigger undesirable negative effects, as for instance overconsumption (Lee et al., 2007). Lastly, neuroscience could help to provide information regarding the encoding of behaviour presented by actors in ads, and help to measure how effective a particular endorser or spokesperson is (Perrachione and Perrachione, 2008).
Conclusion
There is no doubt about the fact that neuromarketing has captured the attention of marketing and advertising practitioners and academics, and that this field of study will continue to be developed and increasingly implemented, in order to improve and expand both marketing theory and practical knowledge. Initial studies have shown that brain imaging tools can be used in consumer and advertising research, to help to prevent marketing failures and make the communication between organizations and their target audience more effective, even though further research is yet necessary and absolutely indispensable. One important contribution of neuroscience to marketing and advertising research was the understanding of emotions, and the important role they play in shaping unconscious decision-making processes of no longer merely rational consumers. Neuromarketing, supported by neuroscientific measurements, has the potential to provide marketers and advertisers in the long rung with more objective research results, as well as novel insights into the neural processes that might lead to specific consumer behaviour.
Images:
I) www.sciencedaily.com; II) www.ucla.edu/alzheimer/images
References
Ambler, T., Ioannides, A., Rose, S. (2000), ‘Brands on the Brain: Neuro-Images of Advertising, Business Strategy Review, Vol. 11, Issue 3, pp. 17-30
Fugate, D. (2007), ‘Neuromarketing: a layman’s look at neuroscience and its potential application to marketing practice’, Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 24, Issue 7, pp. 385–394
Garcia, J., Saad, G. (2008), ‘Evolutionary neuromarketing: Darwinizing the neuroimaging paradigm for consumer behavior’, Journal of Consumer Behaviour, Vol. 7, pp. 397–414
Harris, L., Dennis, C. (2008), Marketing the e-Business, 2nd edition, New York, Routledge
Hoyer, W.D., MacInnis, D.J. (2007), Consumer Behaviour, 4th edition, Bostin, New York, Houghton Mifflin Company
Hubert, M., Kenning, P. (2008), ‘A current overview of consumer neuroscience’, Journal of Consumer Behaviour, Vol. 7, pp. 272–292
Kenning, P. (2008), ‘What advertisers can do and cannot do with neuroscience’, International Journal of Advertising, Advertising & the Brain Special Issue, Vol. 27, Issue 3, pp. 472-473
Kenning, P., Plassmann, H. (2005), ‘NeuroEconomics: An overview from an economic perspective’, Brain Research Bulletin, Vol. 67, pp. 343–35
Kenning, P., Plassmann, H., Ahlert, D. (2007), ‘Applications of functional magnetic resonance imaging for market research’, Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal, Vol. 10, No. 2, pp. 135-152
Kotler, P., Wong, V., Saunders, J., Armstrong, G. (2005), Principles of marketing, 4th European edition, Harlow, Financial Times Prentice Hall
Lee, N., Broderick, A., Chamberlain, L. (2007), ‘What is ‘neuromarketing’? A discussion and agenda for future research’, International Journal of Psychophysiology, Vol. 63, pp. 199–204
Lovell, C. (2008), ‘Is neuroscience making a difference?’, Campaign, 3 October 2008, p. 11
Marci, C.D. (2008), ‘Minding the gap: the evolving relationships between affective neuroscience and advertising research’, International Journal of Advertising, Advertising & the Brain Special Issue, Vol. 27, Issue 3, pp. 473-475
‘Neuromarketing: brain scam or valuable tool?’ (February 3 2005), Marketing Week, pp.22-23
O’Connor, J. (2001), Marketing in the digital age, 2nd edition, Essex, Pearson Education Limited
Perrachione, T. K., Perrachione, J.R. (2008), ‘Brains and brands: Developing mutually informative research in neuroscience and marketing’, Journal of Consumer Behaviour, Vol. 7, pp. 303–318
Solomon, M. Marshall, G., Stuart, E. (2006), Marketing: real people, real choices, Upper Saddle River, N.J. Pearson Education
No comments:
Post a Comment