¹Dr. Hedda Martina Šola,² Dr. Peter Steidl,³M.Sc. Mirta Mikac,
⁴ Dr. Fayyaz Hussain Qureshi,⁵ Sarwar Khawaja

¹Oxford Business College, 65 George Street, Oxford, UK & Institute for Neuromarketing, Jurja Ves III spur no 4, Zagreb, Croatia

²Neurothinking Pty Ltd, 250 St Kilda Road, Southbank, Victoria 3006, Australia

³Institute for Neuromarketing, Jurja Ves III spur no 4, Zagreb, Croatia

⁴,⁵Oxford Business College, 65 George Street, Oxford, UK

DOI : https://doi.org/10.47191/ijsshr/v4-i10-41

Google Scholar Download Pdf
ABSTRACT

While traditional market research methods are focused on surveys and group discussions, consumers’ attitudes, the choices they make, and the behaviour they display are all driven by a complex set of factors, and much of what is happening takes place in the subconscious mind. Learning that a stimulus engages in a positive way and that memory formation is taking place does not tell the marketer anything about the quality and impact of these memories or the engagement. With the technological advances, the emergence of neuroscience-based methodologies offers a higher degree of reliability. In the recent years, a noticeable increase in the use of eye-tracking and EEG frontal asymmetry technique was observed to measure cognitive processes of consumers among which are attention and perception to gain insights into their decision-making processes, consumer preferences and/or motivations. Using a real-world use case, this study highlights the importance of using neuroscience-based methodologies to evaluate packaging design to identify how well the brand is positioning itself on the subconscious level. While results from our study suggest that subjects displayed avoidance behaviour according to the lower frontal alpha asymmetry score, the statistical analysis failed to show significant difference between left and right hemisphere. Regardless of the statistically insignificant EEG findings, relatively longer times to first fixation among the areas on the visual suggest that the visual is not optimally designed and that for obtaining insightful data in product packaging field, relying on eye-tracking techniques is sufficient for reliable insights.

Keywords

Neuromarketing, Neuroscience-Based Market Research, Eye-Tracking, Neuroimaging, Concept Testing, Neuropackaging

References

1) Bargh, J.A. and Chartrand, T.L. 1999. The unbearable automaticity of being. American Psychologist, 54, 462-479.

2) Bargh, J.A. and Morsella, E. 2009. Unconscious behavioral guidance systems, in Then a Miracle Occurs: Focusing on Behavior in Social Psychological Theory and Research, ed. by Agnew C, Carlston D, Graziano W and Kelly J. Oxford University Press, New York.

3) Martin, N. and Morich, K. 2011. Unconscious Mental Processes in Consumer Choice: Toward a New Model of Consumer Behavior. Journal of Brand Management, 18.

4) Beilock, S.L. and Carr, T.H. 2001. On the fragility of skilled performance: What governs chocking under pressure? Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 130, 701-725.

5) Foerde, L., Knowlton, B.J. and Poldrack, R.A. 2006. Modulation of competing memory systems by distraction. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, 103, 11778-11783.

6) Białowas, S.A. and Szyszka, A. 2019. Eye-tracking in Marketing Research, in Managing Economic Innovations – Methods and Instruments, ed. By Romanowski R. BoguckiWyd. Nauk, Poznań.

7) Wilkinson, K.M. and Mitchell, T. 2014. Eye tracking research to answer questions about augmentative and alternative communication assessment and intervention. Augumentative and Alternative Communication, 30, 106-119.

8) Huddleston, P., Behe, B.K., Minahan, S. and Fernandez, R.T. 2015. Seeking attention: An eye tracking study of in-store merchandise displays. International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management, 43, 561574.

9) Atalay, S., Bodur, H. and Rasolofoarison, D. 2012. Shining in the Centre: Central Gaze Cascade Effect on Product Choice. Journal of Consumer Research, 39, 848-866.

10) Wästlund, E., Shams, P. and Otterbring, T. 2018. Unsold is unseen… or is it? Examining the role of peripheral vision in the consumer choice process using eye tracking methodology. Appetite, 120, 49-56.

11) Teixeira, T.S., Wedel, M. and Pieters, R. 2010. Moment-to-Moment Optimal Branding in TV Commercials: Preventing Avoidance by Pulsing. Marketing Science, 29, 783-804.

12) Porta, M., Ravarelli, A. and Spaghi, F. 2013. Online newspapers and ad banners: An eye tracking study on the effects of congruity. Online Information Review, 37, 404-423.

13) Fiszman, P.B., Velasco, C., Salgado, A. and Spence, C. 2013. Using combined eye tracking and word association in order to assess novel packaging solutions: A case study involving jam jars. Food Quality and Preference, 28, 328-338.

14) NeuroRelay, Eye Tracking in Neuromarketing Research. [Online]. (2016). Available: http://neurorelay.com/2016/09/11/eye-tracking-inneuromarketing-research/ [13 August 2021]

15) Wang, Y.J. and Minor, M.S. 2008. Validity, reliability, and applicability of psychophysiological techniques in marketing research. Psychology & Marketing, 25, 197-232.

16) Pomplun, M., Ritter, H. and Velichkovsky, B. 1996. Disambiguating complex visual information: towards communication of personal views of a scene. Perception, 25, 931-948.

17) Bojko, A. 2013. Eye Tracking the user experience. A practical guide to research. Rosenfeld Media, LLC, NYC.

18) Batram, R., Ramaswamy, V., Alden, D.L., Steenkamp, J.-B.E. and Ramachander, S. 2000. Effects of brand local and nonlocal origin on consumer attitudes in developing countries. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 9, 83-95.

19) Ha, L. and Litman, B.R. 1997. Does advertising clutter have diminishing and negative returns? Journal of Advertising, 26, 31-42.

20) Wedel, M. and Pieters, R. 2000. Eye fixations on advertisements and memory for brands: A model and finsings. Marketing Science, 19, 297312.

21) Dimpfel, W. and Morys, A. 2014. Quantitative Objective Assessment of Websites by Neurocode-Tracking in Combination with Eye-Tracking. Journal of Behavioral and Brain Science, 4, 384-395.

22) Bosshard, S.S., Bourke, J.D., Kunaharan, S., Koller, M. and Walla, P. 2016. Established Liked Versus Disliked Brands: Brain Activity, Implicit Associations and Explicit Responses. Cogent Psychology, 3.

23) Morin, C. 2011. Neuromarketing: The New Science of Consumer Behavior. Soc, 48, 131-135.

24) Sammler, D., Grigutsch, M., Fritz, T. and Koelsch, S. 2007. Music and emotion: electrophysiological correlates of the processing of pleasant and unpleasant music. Psychophysiology, 44, 293–304.

25) Adhami, M. 2013. Using Neuromarketing To Discover How We Really Feel About Apps. International Journal of Mobile Marketing, 8, 96-103.

26) Khushaba, R.N., Wise, C., Kodagoda, S., Louviere, J., Kahn, B.E. and Townsend, C. 2013. Consumer neuroscience: Assessing the brain response to marketing stimuli using electroencephalogram (EEG) and eye tracking. Expert Systems with Applications, 40, 3803-3812.

27) Dimigen, O., Sommer, W., Hohlfeld, A., Jacobs, A.M. and Kliegl, R. 2011. Coregistration of eye movements and eeg in natural reading: Analyses and review. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 140, 552.

28) Wallstrom, G.L., Kass, R.E., Miller, A., Cohn, J.F. and Fox, N.A. 2004. Automatic correction of ocular artifacts in the eeg: A comparison of regression-based and component-based methods. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 53,105-119.

29) Loftus, G.R. and Mackworth, N.H. 1978. Cognitive determinants of fixation location during picture viewing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human perception and performance, 4, 565.

30) Chuang, H.-H. and Liu, H.-C. 2012. Effects of different multimedia presentations on viewers’ information-processing activities measured by eye-tracking technology. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 21, 276-286.

31) Johnson, C.I. and Mayer, R.E. 2012. An eye movement analysis of the spatial contiguity effects in multimedia learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 18, 178.

32) Cooper, R. 2001. Winning at New Products. Basic Books, Cambridge, MA. Ramsøy, T.Z., Michael, N. and Michael, I. 2019. A Consumer Neuroscience Study of Conscious and Subconscious Destination Preference. Scientific Reports, 9.

33) Touchette, B. and Lee, S.E. 2016. Measuring neural responses to apparel product attractivness: an application of frontal asymmetry theory. Cloth text Res J, 35, 3-15.

34) Wilson, T.D. 2002. Strangers to ourselves: discovering the adaptive unconscious. Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.

35) Wang, L. 2019. Test and evaluation of advertising effect based on EEG and eye tracker. Translational Neuroscience, 10, 14-18.

36) Lombart, C., Millan, E., Normand, J.-M., Verhuls, A., Labbé-Pinlon, B. and Moreau, G. 2020. Effects of physical, non-immersive virtual, and immersive virtual store environments on consumers’ perceptions and purchase behavior. Computers in Human Behavior, 110.

37) Alvino, L., Pavone, L., Abhishta, A. and Robben, H. 2020. Picking Your Brains: Where and How Neuroscience Tools Can Enhance Marketing Research. Front. Neurosci.

38) Cherubino, P., Martinez-Levy, A.C., Caratù, M., Cartocci, G., Di Flumeri, G., Modica, E., Rossi, D., Mancini, M. and Trettel, A. 2019.

39) Consumer Behaviour through the Eye of Neuropsychological Measures: State-of-the-Art and Future Trends. Comput. IntellNeurosci.

40) Burle, B., Speiser, L., Roger, C., Casini, L., Hasbroucq, T. and Vidal, F. 2015. Spatial and temporal resolutions of EEG: is it really black and white? A scalp current density view. Int. J. Psychophysiol., 97, 210-220.

41) Steidl, P. and Genco, S.J. 2016. Neuroscience Research Approach: Developing an Ethnography of Non-Conscious Consumer Behavior, in Qualitative Research Methods in Consumer Psychology, Ethnography and Culture, ed. By Hackett PMW. pp. 275.

42) Hagemann, D., Naumann, E., Thayer, J.F. and Bartussek, D. 2002. Does resting EEG asymmetry reflect a trait? An application of latent-state trait theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 619-641.

43) Coan, J.A. and Allen, J.J.B. 2003. Frontal EEG asymmetry and behavioral activation and inhibition systems. Psychophysiology, 40, 106-114.

44) Harmon-Jones, E., Gable, P.A. and Peterson, C.K. 2010. The role of asymmetric frontal cortical activity in emotion-related phenomena: A review and update. Biological Psychology, 84, 451-462.

45) Garczarek-Bak, U., Szymkowiak, A., Gaczek, P. and Disterheft, A. 2021. A comparative analysis of neuromarketing methods for brand purchasing predictions among young adults. Journal of Brand Management, 28, 171-185.

46) Bazzani, A., Ravaioli, S., Trieste, L., Faraguna, U. and Turchetti, G. 2020. Is EEG Suitable for Marketing Research? A Systematic Review. Front. Neurosci. Coates, S., Butler, L. and Berry, D.C. 2006. Implicit Memory and Consumer Choice: The Mediating Role of Brand Familiarity. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 20, 1101-1116.

47) Zajonc, R.B. 1968. Attitudinal effects of mere exposure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 9, 1-27.

48) Baker, W., Hutchinson, J.W., Moore, D. and Nedungadi, P. 1986.

49) Brand Familiarity and Advertising: Effects on the Evoked Set and Brand Preference, in NA- Advances in Consumer Research Volume 13, ed. by Lutz RJ. Association for Consumer Research, Provo.

50) Smith, M.E. and Marci, C. 2016. From theory to common practice: Consumer neuroscience goes mainstream. Journal of Measurement, 1.

51) Humphrey, W.F., Rinaldo, S.B. and Laverie, D.A. 2017. Brand choice via incidental social media exposure. Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing, 11.

52) Thornhill, M., Xie, K. and Lee, Y. 2017. Social Media Advertising in a Competitive Market: Effects of Earned and Owned Exposures on Brand Purchase. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Technology, 8.

53) Ramsøy, T.Z. 2015. An Introduction to Consumer Neuroscience & Neuromarketing. Neurons Inc.

54) Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A.-G. and Buchner, A. 2007. G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39, 175-191.

VOlUME 04 ISSUE 10 OCTOBER 2021