Neuromarketing is often regarded as a new concept and a new approach to marketing research. However, this field is gaining momentum, and companies incorporate diverse neuromarketing methods into their research to get insights into the way people view products and related data. Harrell (2019) and Hsu (2017) shed light on the peculiarities of neuromarketing and its potential in the sphere of current marketing research. This paper includes a brief analysis of the articles by Harrell (2019) and Hsu (2017) that dwell upon the basics of neuromarketing.
First, both authors define the term and provide an overview of the history of neuromarketing. Harrell (2019) notes that neuromarketing is “the measurement of physiological and neural signals to gain insight into customers’ motivations, preferences, and decisions, which can help inform creative advertising, product development, pricing, and other marketing areas” (p. 64). Hsu (2017) refers to neuromarketing as a set of brain-based approaches that “measure customers’ underlying thoughts, feelings, and intentions” (p. 6). Although the researchers agree that the rapid development and deep interest in such measurements started in the 2000s, Hsu (2017) adds that this attention to brain-based methods dates as far back as the 1910s. At the beginning of the twentieth century, psychologists assumed that the human mind could be seen as a mechanism that determines people’s behavior and diverse mental states.
It is stressed that the field did not develop properly during the twentieth century as more traditional forms such as focus groups and surveys seemed sufficient and relevant. The cost of the implementation of conventional methods and neuromarketing differs considerably, so the former was a preferred strategy for decades (Hsu, 2017; Harrell, 2019). However, the validity and precision of these tools have been doubtful (Hsu, 2017). For instance, introspection measures can be appropriate for highly quantitative choices, such as pricing. The validity is the most compromised feature of conventional strategies. It is often argued that questions asked can be irrelevant or inappropriate, which can distort the findings, and customers can conceal their true reactions due to various reasons. Moreover, participants may try to be sincere, but due to the peculiarities of human memory and cognitive functions, they may simply forget or misinterpret important information, which may lead to wrong conclusions. Since neuromarketing explores the exact reactions of people’s minds, it is possible to elicit true mental responses. Harrel (2019) also emphasizes another benefit of neuromarketing, stating that brain-based research methods can predict customers’ future behavior, preferences, and mindsets.
Some of the most utilized neuromarketing techniques include fMRI (functional magnetic resonance imaging, EEG (electro-encephalogram), PET (positron emission tomography), eye tracking (gazing and pupillometry), biometrics, and facial coding. EEG is seen as the preferable method as it is the least expensive method, but it still provides relevant data (Hsu, 2017). Neuromarketing researchers explore different reactions of the brain (and its different zones) to various stimuli.
At the same time, neuromarketing also faces a considerable degree of criticism. Skeptics claim that neuroscience is still in its infancy, and people simply cannot interpret the data they obtain (Hsu, 2017). For instance, different reactions and functions are grouped in certain zones, so it can be impossible to estimate what exactly led to this or that response. However, Hsu (2017) states that brain-based techniques do not focus on specific zones but explore the correspondence between these regions. Therefore, due to the diverse types of techniques and measures, the received data is validated and relevant. The proponents of the use of the brain-based approach admit that there may be a certain lack of precision. The participants of neuromarketing studies are placed in laboratories, so their reaction will differ from the ones they will have in natural settings (Hsu, 2017). Harrel (2019) emphasizes that companies should also be cautious when choosing the laboratory, equipment providers, or research enterprise as this market is still developing and many unreliable vendors and businesses come into play.
The authors also address important aspects that are rarely addressed in marketing research. For instance, Hsu (2017) claims that brain-based approaches can provide valuable insights into the field of consumer behavior and become the ground for the development of theoretical frameworks. Harrel (2019) pays substantial attention to ethical concerns that can be associated with neuromarketing. The researcher notes that marketing research is not confined to customers’ reactions and predictions based on the elicited information. Marketing researchers also attempt to develop techniques to affect people’s behavior and choices, which raises diverse ethical issues (Harrel, 2019). Such techniques include better segmentation, sleep nudging, hormone manipulation, and temporary neural inhibition.
In conclusion, it is possible to state that Hsu (2017) and Harrel (2019) provide valuable insights into the specifics of neuromarketing and the way it is evolving. It is clear that marketers start incorporating brain-based approaches to promote diverse products and services. Technological and scientific advances enable companies to understand customers better and develop products people are more eager to purchase, as well as affect people’s behaviors to increase sales. Still, the field needs certain improvements associated with the validity of the results and conclusions. Ethical concerns also require special attention and need to be resolved.
References
Harrel, E. (2019). Neuromarketing: What you need to know. Harvard Business Review, 64–70.
Hsu, M. (2017). Neuromarketing: Inside the mind of the consumer. Harvard Business Review, 1–18.