Neuromarketing = Pseudo-Science

Mya Frazier wrote an interesting article for AdAge about the credibility of today's Neuromarketing. It's an insightful look at the current advent of Neuromarketing and who will soon knock at your agency door. Reading it, one realizes that most of this science is based on half-ass experiments and pseudo-science.

And, this flawed approach is still running rampant: Buying behavior is much more complex and layered than flawed science can ever try to explain:

"Indeed, in the view of some neuroscientists and marketing researchers, the notion that the human brain should be studied in isolation is deeply flawed to begin with. Measuring the brain's reaction to a TV spot simply does not provide enough data to extrapolate future behavior. Studying how a person interacts within the larger culture is far more important.
'There are many other constraints outside the brain that make us act the way we do,' said John Winsor, VP-director of the cognitive and cultural radar department in Crispin Porter & Bogusky's Boulder, Colo., office.

For example, does it make a difference if a test subject's brain lights up while viewing a Hummer ad in Boulder, where 'you feel guilty if you don't drive a Prius, or where my parents live, in Cody, Wyo., where the norm is to drive a pickup truck?'

'There are other factors that control how we are going to interact, and culture is a big one,' he added."

As Herd explains in his blog, most of our behavior is based on other people. It's a very basic truth (Social Drinking, Social Smoking, etc.) but often overlooked. Scientists should focus their efforts on this phenomenon, instead of lugging equipment around just to make a buck.

In his own words: "(...) we're nearing the end of the beginning for understanding the general principles of the relationship between brain activity and behaviour but no further.

And we're extremely unlikely to get where the neuromarketers would like us to get: understanding the precise relationship between stimulus, brain activity and behaviour.

The biggest problem is that ours is a social brain not an individual self-determining brain: it's the brain of a creature whose life consists largely of other people and interaction with them. Looking at it as if it were otherwise and the creature that owns it as an isolated agent is a pointless abstraction."

Placebo Effect

There are two types of people: The optimists and the pessimists. Some might call them the naive and the sceptics. Depends on your point of view.

A new study shows how to market to the optimist group: Describe in detail the product experience people will have. Go in detail about your store, your product, the ingredients, give them a taste of what they are going to experience when they purchase your product. These positive enhancers can be found in the group that reacts to a placebo pill and they are also more interested in taking chances to win money. Actually, chances were 50/50 to win or lose money. But the positive enhancers were just excited about the possibility to win money.
The basic rule for this happy audience: Make sure not to contradict their expected experience: If you market the solitude of First Class flying, don't bother them with filled lounges or rowdy bars on-board. If you market a performance vehicle, make sure the product experience is not that of a lame duck.

The big questions remains: How to market to the sceptics? Just through facts and information? Does this ever work in marketing? Don't think so.

I believe things are much more complicated than the study indicates. Each of us is a pessimist and optimist, depending on your day, your mood, your perception of a brand, your perception of the world that day. Generally, I would put myself in the skeptics group. But not always: When I got my iPhone, I didn't have any pessimistic/skeptical feelings about this purchase. It didnt' even cross my mind that the iPhone would not live up to the hype.
I checked out Bacardi's Mojito site a few days days ago and immediately imagined myself on a hot summer day drinking this refreshening cocktail. Images of South Beach, hammocks and sunsets floated through my mind. I completely forgot that my homemade mojitos never taste that great and they will never be as good as the ones in the Delano. Ok, I didnt' buy Bacardi this weekend but I'm still thinking about it.

In the end, marketing only works when you are in this open/positive mood. Certain brands stimulate positiveness: Apple, Virgin, Nike. Most of the other brands have to work harder: They have to build experiences that allow people to become open to new ideas, new products, new ideas. This can be done through a delighting site, a surprising product experience, a heart-warming encounter with a company rep. It's about opening hearts. And minds.

The importance of reflection

I'm a big fan of Ira Glass (of "This American Life" fame). Presentation Zen posted a couple of clips sharing his insights into the art of storytelling.

One thing that made me think was the 'moment of reflection' - that point when we take a breather from the story, action or drama, and have a chance to reflect on what we are being told. Being interesting is not enough unless we can also make sense of it and understand why it is important.

I was reminded of this again a few weeks ago: My wife and I watched a few episodes of Lost. It was just too easy to click on 'Play' again and watch an episode after another. Even though I was completely into the story, I could not remember any of the details a few minutes later. In my mind, the storyline became a big mess and it was hard for me to make sense of it all.

This is another side of the a 'moment of reflection' and the need to make sense of a story: its importance for moving memories from short term to long term memory. Short term memories are registered literally (visually, accoustically, etc.) whereas long term memories are registered semantically - it is the association and the meanings that are tied to the memories - and without the opportunity to reflect and make sense, these memories become washed away.

That's why it's so hard to remember movies on planes - the movie is immediately followed by another form of entertainment: iPod, magazines, food, conversation. Because your stuck in a god awful seat in a god awful plane, you have no opportunity to reflect and consider.

What does it mean? The question for marketers is how often consumers have a 'moment of reflection' with advertising? How many ads truly provoke reflection? Is engagement without reflection enough?

On the other hand if it is important for long term memories how many pre-testing models take this into account?

Hype sucks

I discovered another insightful blog: Science Daily. It's an encyplopedia of insightful studies that have serious implications on business practices.

Science Daily published a study of assistant professor Vanessa Patrick (University of Georgia) along with co-authors Debbie MacInnis and C. Whan Park (University of Southern California): “Marketing: Too Much Hype Backfires.” The study shows that “people take notice when they feel worse than they thought they would, but—oddly—not when they feel better than expected.”

The team invented the term “affective misforecasting” to describe the gap between anticipated and actual feelings. This supports the old marketing belief that people tell five others about a bad experience but only one about a good experience (“negative evangelism”?). One thing seems certain: “under promising and over delivering” is the way to go.