Neuromarketing and the perception of knowledge

Michael J.R. Butler *

Aston Business School, Aston University, Aston Triangle, Birmingham B4 7ET, UK



The emerging field of neuromarketing reveals that knowledge has plasticity. In other words,differentstakeholders,marketingresearchersandpractitioners,perceivethedevelop-ment and application of neuromarketing knowledge in different ways. Having different perceptionsofknowledgeisnotanewissue,butfindingnewinterconnectionsbetweenthose perceptions is beneficial to knowledge creation and diffusion. The research–practice gap inneuromarketing is briefly discussed and then resolved through the contribution of thiscommentary, the proposal of a novel Neuromarketing Research Model. The Model interconnects basic research reporting, applied research reporting, media reportingand power processes.

2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Introduction

A man may be very sincere in good principles, without having good practice. Dr. Samuel Johnson (1709–1784): Bos-well, Tour of the Hebrides, 25 October 1773.

It may seem odd to connect neuromarketingand the perception of knowledge, but theemerging field of neuromarketing reveals afundamentaltensionwithin organisationstudies– the perennial concern about the interconnec-tion between research and practice. It willbe argued here that the research and practiceaudiences have different perceptions aboutthe development and application of knowl-edge about neuromarketing and, as a con-sequence, it is incumbent on this community of practice, like other fields of knowledge, tofind a way of reconciling these differences. Tothis end, a novel research model for neuro-marketing is proposed.This is only a short commentary and so aboundary will be put on the discussion by focusingonwhatismeantbytheperceptionof knowledge, highlighting some key issuesconcerning neuromarketing and the research–practice interconnection and proposing aNeuromarketing Research Model.

Perception of knowledge

In 1967 Jacob Bronowski gave the forty-fourth Silliman Foundation Lectures at Yale Univer-sity. In the ﬁrst lecture he argued that:

‘we need to review the whole of our natural philosophy in the light of scientiﬁc knowledge that has arisen the last ﬁfty

Journal of Consumer Behaviour

J. Consumer Behav.

: 415–419 (2008)Published online in Wiley InterScience(www.interscience.wiley.com)

DOI:

10.1002/cb.260*Correspondence to: Michael J.R. Butler, Aston BusinessSchool, Aston University, Aston Triangle, Birmingham B47ET, UK.E-mail: m.j.r.butler@aston.ac.uk

SeeJohnson S.(1977).Boswell,Tour oftheHebrides, 17September 1773. In

The Penguin Dictionary of Quota-tions

, Cohen JM, Cohen MJ (eds.), page 210. Book Club Associates, London.

2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Journal of Consumer Behaviour, July–October 2008

DOI: 10.1002/cb

years. It is really pointless to go on talkingabout what the world is like

. . .

when themodesofperceptionoftheworldwhichareaccessible to us have so changed incharacter.’ (Bronowski, 1978, p. 4).

Three ideas emerge from this quote which are relevant to this Special Issue: the meaningof natural philosophy, changing scientificknowledge and the role of perception.By natural philosophy Bronowski (1978,p.4)meant‘that enterpriseofthehumanmind which attempts to trace lawfulness in nature,dead and living, but which is not directed tospecific inquiries into how this or that law works’. Similarly, neuromarketing is con-cerned with the general nature of natural lawsbecause it has been defined as understandinghuman behaviour in the specific context of markets and marketing exchanges (Lee

et al

.,2007).Bronowski (1978) also discusses how onesystem of scientiﬁc knowledge replacesanother. Indeed, he anticipated the move toa focus on understanding human behaviour inbiological terms by, in his ﬁrst lecture, askingthe question ‘What kind of an animal is a man’?(Bronowski, 1978, p. 7). Following this line of questioning, neuromarketing is attempting tounderstand the biology of human behaviour,especially, in this context, of the thoughts andactions of the consumer.By the role of perception Bronowski (1978,p. 5) took a Kantian view: ‘He [Kant] wrote anumber of books and papers whose basicmessage was this: our knowledge of theoutside world depends on our modes of perception,andIamgoingtowritephilosophy asa descriptionofthestructureofthe world asseen by man’. Bronowski (1978) uses themetaphor of the physiology of the eye todiscuss perception, which he sees as

the

problem for anyone who seeks to understandall aspects of nature. The eye exercises finediscrimination using very coarse units becausethe system of interconnection is such that agreat deal of overlap is created, and as a resultnot only the brain but the eye itself makesinferences about the world. The point for neuromarketing is the interconnection of frames of interpretation in order to achieve afuller understanding of consumer behaviour.Unfortunately, there is more of a research–practice gap than an interconnection inneuromarketing. There is, though, a biologicalturn and a focus on understanding underlyingprocesses concerning markets and marketingexchanges. This commentary is concerned with resolving the research–practice gap, butfirst, the nature of the gap needs to be briefly discussed.

Research–practice gap in neuromarketing

Inasuccinctandbalancedsurveyoftheﬁeldof neuromarketing, Fugate (2007) concludes hisarticle by arguing that in order for the ﬁeld tobecome legitimised, it would be necessary toconstruct a behavioural model that wouldpredict which stimuli (marketing inputs)provide the appropriate brain structure with the material it needs to accomplish its assignedtask.Heacceptsthatthisisfarinthefutureandrequires more of a shift from basic to appliedresearch in neuromarketing. Such a shift islikely to result in more complexity andambiguity, as simplistic and causal expla-nations of arousal and market behaviour become even rarer.Similarly, Lee

et al

. (2007) emphasise theimportance of more scientific analysis to under-standing marketing-relevant human behaviour.In particular, the self-assessment measurescommonly used in marketing research rely totally on the ability and willingness of therespondent to accurately report their attitudesand/or prior behaviours. Instead, physiologicalresponses can be collected when respondentsare directly participating in the behaviour andare difficult for subjects to control.Inordertodevelopanewbehaviouralmodelof consumer behaviour, Fugate (2007) arguesthat marketing researchers and practitionersshould adopt new roles. Researchers shoulduse neuroimaging to confirm, reconfigure or improve conventional theories of consumer

2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Journal of Consumer Behaviour, July–October 2008

DOI: 10.1002/cb

416 Michael J.R. Butler

behaviour.Such validation efforts might not beconclusive, but it is likely that some strengthsand weaknesses in existing theories will bediscovered. Practitioners, for their part, shouldbe forthcoming with their experiments andresults, which might have two effects. First,releasing such data might demonstrate thatneuromarketing is not incompatible with con-sumerinterestsand,second,thedatamighthelpconsumers knowthemselves better, so they cancurb, e.g. overspending, which, in turn, informspolicy making.There are moves to achieve Fugate’s (2007) vision. Marketing researchers are using neu-roimaging in the context of consumer behaviour. Kenning

et al

. (2007) have shown thatalthough in its infancy fMRI seems to be auseful and promising tool for market research-ers because it reveals how emotions influencebrand positioning, advertising strategies andpricing strategies.Practitioners are mindful of the need for scientific rigour and ethical considerations intheir work. Michael Brammer (2004), Chair-man of Neurosense Limited, in correspon-dence with the Editor of Nature Neuroscience,pointed out commercial success depends onclients having confidence in the results they arepresentedwithandconfidencecomesfromrigour and ethical practice.Clearly, the research and practice audiencesstill have different perceptions about thedevelopment and application of neuromarket-ing knowledge. In order to take advantage of the benefits of Bronowski’s (1978) interconnec-tionofframesofinterpretation,itisimportanttofind a way of reconciling these differences.

Neuromarketing research model

A novel Neuromarketing Research Model isproposed to interconnect thedifferent percep-tions of neuromarketing knowledge. It inter-connects marketing researchers, practitionersand other stakeholders. It is developed fromthe work of Stokes (1997) and Tushman

et al

.(2007; Tushman and O’Reilly, 2007).Stokes (1997) proposed that research becharacterised by the joint goals of under-standing and use (

Figure 1

). The QuadrantModel of Scientiﬁc Research shows how someresearch was driven by understanding but notuse, e.g. Bohr’s discovery of the structure of the atom. Other research developed applieduses, for instance, Edison’s invention of thephonograph. More research proceeded with joint goals, e.g. Pasteur’s development of microbiology.Tushman

et al

. (2007; Tushman andO’Reilly, 2007) adapt Stokes’ (1997) Modelto inform the debate about the role of businessschool research (

Figure 2

). Tushman

et al

.(2007; Tushman and O’Reilly,2007) argue thatunlikeconventionalacademicdisciplineswhich focusonbasicdisciplinaryresearch(economics,psychology and sociology) and consulting ﬁrms which focus on meeting clients’ needs,business schools and professional schoolsmore generally are about rigour and relevance. WhilstagreeingwithTushman

etal

.’s(2007;Tushman and O’Reilly, 2007) argument, their model is problematic. Not all business schoolresearch neatly ﬁts into their professionalschools/business schools quadrant. Indeed,their quadrant compresses different research activities into one box.

Figure 1.