A current overview of consumer neuroscience

Mirja Hubert*

and Peter Kenning

Zeppelin University, Am Seemooser Horn 20, 88045 Friedrichshafen, Germany



The emerging discipline of neuroeconomics employs methods originally used in brainresearch for investigating economic problems, and furthers the advance of integratingneuroscientific findings into the economic sciences. Neuromarketing or consumer neuro- scienceisasub-areaofneuroeconomicsthataddressesmarketingrelevantproblemswithmethods and insights from brain research. With the help of advanced techniques of neurology, which are applied in the field of consumer neuroscience, a more direct viewinto the ‘‘black box’’ of the organism should be feasible. Consumer neuroscience, still in itsinfancy,shouldnotbeseenasachallengetotraditionalconsumerresearch,butconstitutesacomplementingadvancementforfurtherinvestigationofspecificdecision-makingbehavior.



The key contribution of this paper is to suggest a distinct definition of consumer neuroscience as the scientific proceeding, and neuromarketing as the application of these findings within the scope of managerial practice. Furthermore, we aim to develop a foundationalunderstandingofthefield,movingawayfromthederisoryassumptionthat consumer neuroscience is about locating the ‘‘buy button’’ in the brain. Against thisbackground the goal of this paper is to present specific results of selected studies from thisemerging discipline, classified according to traditional marketing-mix instruments suchas product, price, communication, and distribution policies, as well as brand research.The paper is completed by an overview of the most prominent brain structures relevant for consumer neuroscience, and a discussion of possible implications of these insights for economic theory and practice.

2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Introduction

In recent years, interest in applying neuro-scientiﬁc ﬁndings and methodologies to other disciplineshasbeenincreasing.Theinnovativeapproach of neuroeconomics demonstratesthat this development has been incorporatedinto economic research (Braeutigam, 2005;Camerer

et al

., 2005; Kenning and Plassmann,2005; Singer and Fehr, 2005). Neuroeco-nomics employs methods originally used inbrain research to investigate economic pro-blems, and further advances the integration of neuroscientiﬁc ﬁndings into the economicsciences. Although both economists andneurologists attempt to understand and pre-dict human behavior, they have used quitedifferent methods in the past. Whereas eco-nomic research has tried to explain behavior through observational data and theoretical

Journal of Consumer Behaviour

J. Consumer Behav.

: 272–292 (2008)Published online in Wiley InterScience(www.interscience.wiley.com)

DOI:

10.1002/cb.251*Correspondence to: Mirja Hubert, Zeppelin University, Am Seemooser Horn 20, 88045 Friedrichshafen, Germany.E-mail: mirja.hubert@zeppelin-university.de

Chair of Marketing.

2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Journal of Consumer Behaviour, July–October 2008

DOI: 10.1002/cb

constructs such as utility or preferences,neurology contemplates the physiologicalelements and somatic variables that inﬂuencebehavior. Neuroeconomics, which evolvedfrom the combination of both disciplines,proposes an interdisciplinary approach andspeciﬁcally examines the neural correlates of decision-making (Sanfey

et al

., 2006). Market-ing research has discovered neuroscience as well. Neuromarketing or consumer neuro-science is a sub-area of neuroeconomics thataddresses marketing relevant problems with methods and insights from brain research (Fugate, 2007; Lee

et al

., 2007).Classical consumer research has seen thehuman organism ﬁguratively as a ‘‘black box,’’into which investigators could not gain directinsights. Instead, they had to use theoreticalconstructsinordertoexplainhumanbehavior.In this sense, the stimulus–organism–responsemodel, which originated in neo-behaviorism,explains the initiation of behavior by acontrolled stimulus (e.g., price) or an uncon-trolled stimulus (e.g., weather). The stillunobservableprocessingofthisstimulusinsidethe organism is then related to the resultingobservable reaction (e.g., purchase) (Howardand Sheth, 1969). Examinations of the pro-cessesinsidethehumanorganismarebasedonestablished indirect methods such as electro-dermal response (EDR) measurement, pupillo-graphy, and, most common, self-assessmentmethods (Bagozzi, 1991; Groeppel-Klein,2005). A more direct view into the black boxoftheorganismshouldbefeasiblewiththehelp of advanced techniques and methods of brain research that are now applied in the ﬁeldof consumer neuroscience (Kenning

et al

.,2007a). Even though the application of neurobiological methods such as electroence-phalography (EEG) is not new in marketingresearch, the direct observation of the reac-tions within the brain that is now availablethrough the use of steadily improving methodsof imaging techniques, for example, positronemission tomography (PET) or functionalmagnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), is provid-ing a completely different perspective (Plas-smann

et al

., 2007a).The determination of cortical areas that arestimulated during consumer decision proces-sing is important for various reasons. First, theapproach of consumer neuroscience enablestheresearchertoreassessexistingtheoriesthattheoretically assume different brain mechan-isms (e.g., hemisphere theory) by investigatingthe actual brain activations. Beyond this, theobservation of the total brain has the potentialto yield new, unpredictable results, andenhances the explorative character of con-sumer neuroscience. This contrasts measuringthe brain activity by recording only one signal,as it is used, for example, in EDR or eyetracking, which can be compared to an effortto capture the musical sounds of an orchestraby measuring only the noise level (Kenning

et al

., 2007a). Third, concerning the empiricaldata ascertainment, the observation of brainactivity can offer another, and more objective,perspective: self-assessment methods that rely totally on the ability of the respondent todescribeand reconstructfeelingsandthoughtsare very subjective. Many effects in the humanorganism that influence behavior are notperceived consciously; hence, the cognitivefilter of the test taker may bias the results. For example, a person who has a temperature may determine that his body feels cold, eventhoughtheobjective measurement ofaclinicalthermometer indicates that it is not. Fourth,strategic behavior and social desirability, which can confound findings of self-assess-ment methods, can be eliminated, given thatthe participating subjects have little to noinfluence on the measurement of their brainactivity (Camerer

et al

., 2005). A last, but very important, advantage of determining thecortical stimulation is the simultaneousnessof measurement and experiment. Some pro-cesses might not be stable over time, making it very difﬁcult for researcher and participant toreconstruct them

ex-post

(Lee

et al

., 2007). As a consequence of these advantages, thecrossing of the own disciplinary boundariesand the consideration of all aspects thatdeterminedecision-makingcanhelpconsumer researchers and social scientists to more fully understand human behavior (Zaltman, 2000).

2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Journal of Consumer Behaviour, July–October 2008

DOI: 10.1002/cb

A current overview of consumer neuroscience 273

With better comprehension and steadily improving methods, it may be possible toderive new theories for marketing research and to arrive at a higher level of explained variance (Knutson

et al

., 2007). This may inturn help to improve companies’ actions, for example, marketing responses that are basedon a better satisfaction of unconscious emo-tional consumer needs. However, consumer neuroscience is still in its infancy and shouldnot be seen as a challenge to traditionalconsumer research. Rather, it constitutes acomplementingadvancementforfurtherinvesti-gation of speciﬁc decision-making behavior.The increasing relevance of this area of research is indicatedbythe growinginterestof science and practice (Fugate, 2007; Lee

et al

.,2007; Plassmann

et al

., 2007a). For example,numerous conferences, calls for papers fromprominent scientiﬁc journals, and calls for research by institutes such as the MarketingScience Institute, the Institute for the Study of Business Markets (Lee

et al

., 2007), and the World Advertising Research Centre focus onthis subject. The Association of Consumer Research even implemented a new contentarea code for neuroscience. Furthermore,‘‘googling’’ the term ‘‘neuromarketing’’ cur-rently yields more than 800000 hits, which establishes the ﬁeld’s move into the main-stream of research (

Figure 1

). Against the background of the embryonicnature of the field, a key contribution of thispaper is to suggest a distinct definition of neuromarketing and consumer neuroscience.The term ‘‘consumer neuroscience’’ com-prisesthescientificproceedingofthisresearch approach, and ‘‘neuromarketing’’ designatesthe application of the findings from consumer neuroscience within the scope of managerialpractice. Because of the way the terms areapplied in the existing literature, and toprevent misunderstandings, both terms arestill used synonymously in the following.Furthermore, we aim to develop a definitivefoundation, moving away from the derisory assumption that consumer neuroscience isused for locating the ‘‘buy button’’ in the brain(Blakeslee, 2004). In order to achieve our goal,thispaperdiscussesawidescopeofmarketing-mix instruments and addresses the questionof the extent to which the application of

Figure 1.

Development of google hits on neuromarketing 2003–2007.

2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Journal of Consumer Behaviour, July–October 2008

DOI: 10.1002/cb