African Journal of Business Management Vol.5 (5), pp. 1528-1532, 4 March, 2011
Available online at http://www.academicjournals.org/AJBM
ISSN 1993-8233 ©2011 Academic Journals
Review
Neuromarketing: Where marketing and neuroscience
meet
Zineb Ouazzani Touhami1,2*, Larbi Benlafkih1, Mohamed Jiddane3,5, Yahya Cherrah5, Hadj
Omar EL Malki2,5,6 and Ali Benomar2,4,5,6
1Education Sciences School, University Mohammed Vth Souissi, Rabat, Morocco.
2Medical Center of Clinical Trials and Epidemiological Study (CRECET), Medical School, University Mohammed Vth
Souissi, Rabat, Morocco.
3Radiology Department, Hôpital des Spécialités, Rabat, Morocco.
4Neurology Department « B », Hôpital des Spécialités, Rabat, Morocco.
5Medical School, University Mohammed Vth Souissi, Rabat, Morocco.
6Biostatical, clinical research and epidemiological laboratory (LBRCE), Medical School, University Mohammed Vth
Souissi, Rabat, Morocco
Accepted 30 November, 2010
Neuromarketing is a new field where brain science and marketing meet. The emergence of brain
imaging encourages marketers to use high-tech imaging techniques to resolve marketing issues.
Marketers and advertisers have exploited the results of many brain imaging studies to know what could
drives consumer’s behavior. They have found out that some marketing actions can generate added
satisfaction in a placebo-like manner. The findings of the human reward system studies also play an
important role in neuromarketing research. The number of neuromarketing studies is growing and the
findings are important for marketing research. However neuromarketing suffers from many limits that
are a barrier to its development. Through this article, we attempt to give an overview on neuromarketing
and its neural correlates while provide a perspective toward the use of field for less commercial
purposes.
Key words: Neuromarketing, neuroscience, marketing, reward system, marketing placebo effect.
INTRODUCTION
Recent years have seen an emergence in the abilities of
neuroscientists to study cortical activity in terms of
frequency and discoveries. Indeed, the recent techniques
of functional imaging have permitted a deep knowledge in
neuroscience and a precision of brain areas responsible
for some pleasures and emotions. However, most social
sciences have yet to adopt neuroimaging as a standard
tool or procedure for research and marketing research
has been far slower to wake up to the benefits of this
technique (Lee et al., 2007). Economists were the first to
propose the "neuroeconomics" (Zak, 2004; Kenning and
Plassmann, 2005; Rustitchini, 2005). The aim was to
better understand the decision process of economical
*Corresponding author. E-mail: ouazzani_zineb@hotmail.com.
agents decision to approaches of cognitive psychology
and neuroscience (Droulers and Roullet, 2006). Recent
years have seen the development of a new discipline
which can be labeled as “neuromarketing” or “consumer
neuroscience”. The goal of this emerging discipline is the
transfer of insights from neurology to research in
consumer behavior by applying neuroscientific methods
to marketing relevant problems (Stoll et al., 2008). Thus,
we can consider that the neuromarketing is where
neuroscience and marketing meet.
Different techniques are used in neuromarketing.
Among them, we have the positron emission tomography
(PET), the functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI),
the electroencephalography (EEG), the
magnetoencephalography (MEG) and the galvanic skin
response (GSR). Even if these techniques remain
expensive and unavailable, the use of the EEG and the
GSR are most current in marketing research. Since the
birth of neuromarketing, researchers have more focused
on some fields like the impact of advertisements and their
memory. Also, in order to realize "neuromarketing"
studies, some specialized agencies were born: Neuroco
and Neurosense in UK, BrightHouse Neurostrategies and
NeuroInsights in USA, PHD Media in Canada, SalesBrain
in France, Neuro Insight in Australia and a lot more.
Among these agencies, some really experience such
studies, but others don’t having no recourse to scientific
techniques used in neuromarketing.
In this article we suggest studying neuromarketing
through different angles. First, we will try to understand
the link between neuromarketing and the humans reward
system. Then, we’ll point to the importance of the placebo
effect in neuromarketing before tackling with the branding
(application that has done most to know neuromarketing).
Hence, throughout this paper, we will give an overview of
the achieved works previously in this domain. Finally,
we’ll raise the controversy around neuromarketing, which
is still at an embryonic stage till nowadays. The objective
here is to make neuromarketing better known, and to
explain the existence of some psychological phenomena
through scientific and objective notions.
NEUROMARKETING AND REWARD SYSTEM
Placed at the heart of the midbrain, the reward system is
necessary to the survival of animals and humans. Its
functioning is due the motivation which pushes to
accomplish simple actions or behaviors as looking for
food or reproduction, to more complex actions like the
choice of an object, a brand or an investment. Neurobiologically,
reward is mediated by dopaminergic systems
involving the ventral striatum which includes the ventral
tegmental area (VTA), nucleus accumbens and
amygdala. This reward system that induces subjective
feelings of pleasure and contributes to positive emotions
is the same as the one activated when consuming some
drugs - especially cocaine – bringing about addiction. So,
some people become addicted to certain brands, tastes
and products. Several studies were conducted on rats
(Phillips et al., 1975) and on monkeys (Schultz et al.,
1992; Morgan et al., 2002; Schultz, 2004). The activity of
dopaminergic neurons in the nucleus accumbens has
been shown to increase their activity by selfadministration
of cocaine or after the presentation of
liquid or solid rewards. It’s the same thing after the
presentation of stimuli predicting the reward.
Erk et al. (2002) have studied the rewarding properties
of cultural objects, mainly cars. The choice of such a
category of products is not anodyne; cars can effectively
reflect a degree of wealth and social domination.
Compared to small cars and limousines, sports cars was
considered more attractive, causing more activation in
ventral striatum, orbitofrontal cortex, anterior cingulated
Touhami et al. 1529
and occipital regions. Therefore, the subjects have felt a
higher potential reward when viewing a sports car image;
the sign of domination and of a high social rank.
Money is also a strong stimulus which can easily
activate the human reward system. Nowadays, the notion
of money is strongly assimilated to that of finance and
investment. Recently, financial theories has been greatly
enhanced by the study of investor psychology and
behavior. The application of knowledge in cognitive
neuroscience and neuroimaging has widely contributed
that. Indeed, fMRI findings offer the opportunity to discern
the fundamental neural processes that drive rational and
irrational investor behavior. In an article published by
Peterson (2007), the author discusses implications of one
aspect of the relationship between the brain and the
financial markets – the brain’s “reward system approach”.
Thus, it was found that rewards activate the brain much
differently than losses, both during anticipation and
receipt (gain or loss). Indeed, the anticipation or expectation
of receiving monetary rewards primarily active the
nucleus accumbens (NACC), while receiving or enjoying
a reward active the medial prefrontal cortex (MPFC).
Moreover, anticipation of increasing reward magnitude
increasingly activates the NACC, while increasing reward
outcomes increasingly activate the MPFC.
Additionally, the level of NACC activation decreases
after reward outcome to a level either slightly below
baseline if the anticipated reward is received and to
significantly below baseline if the anticipated reward is
not received. In his study, Peterson had a wider sight by
linking the reward system with the personality, the
impulse, the affect and the good mood of the investor.
Along with cultural objects and money, neuroimaging
studies have shown that the ventral striatum may also be
activated during the presentation of more natural rewards
such as sexual stimuli (Karama et al., 2002) or food
(Small et al., 2001).
THE MARKETING PLACEBO EFFECT
Towards the end of the 18th century, the term "placebo" (
"I shall please") takes its medical sense and will be the
prescription given to please and satisfy the therapeutic
desire of a patient (Guy-Coichard and Boureau, 2005).
Shapiro (1964) defined the placebo as “any therapeutic
procedure (or a component of any therapeutic procedure)
which is given deliberately to have an effect or
unknowingly and has an effect on a symptom, syndrom,
disease, or patient but which is objectively without
specific activity for the condition being treated”. This
same author has defined the placebo effect as “the
therapeutic effect produced by a placebo”.
Since a few years, the placebo effect is not only
connected with the medical field. Shiv et al. (2005)
document for the first time that non-conscious expectations
about the relationship between price and quality
1530 Afr. J. Bus. Manage.
can influence consumers in a placebo-like manner. Some
marketing actions, such as changes in the price, can
affect neural representations on experienced
pleasantness and on the efficacy of consumed products.
Authors have shown, out of three experiences, that
consumers who pay a less high price for a given product
can take smallest advantage when consuming it, in
comparison with consumers who paid a higher price.
These results were reinforced later by Plassmann et al.
(2008) who proved that increasing the price of a same
wine increases subjective reports of flavor pleasantness
(stated preference) as well as BOLD (Blood-oxygen-level
dependent) activity in medial orbitofrontal cortex, an area
that is widely thought to encode for experienced
pleasantness during experiential tasks. The use of
functional imaging techniques let go the placebo effect
passes out of the subjective realm of being "all in the
head" into something real and measurable.
Notably, a highly motivation and expectation play an
important role in marketing placebo effect. The vast
majority of imaging on the placebo effect has focused on
the lessening of painful stimuli through suggestion. Even
without placebos, mere expectation (or anticipation)
alters the processing of tactile stimuli (Berns, 2005).
Irmak et al. (2005) conducted a study on the placebo
effect for an energy drink. They found that the placebo
effect manifests only for consumers who desire (high
motivation) the arousing effects of an energy drink. The
placebo energy drink was capable of raising blood
pressure, increasing physical reflexes, enhancing mental
alertness, and raising the self-reported arousal level for
the participants. In particular, these effects were only
observed for highly motivated subjects who read
informations about the energy drink purportedly
excerpted from a prestigious newspaper.
Till the studies of Shiv et al. (2005), the placebo effect
was presumed as a conscious mechanism. These
authors suggest that kinds of placebo effects can done
without catching conscience. The extrinsic components of
products, especially the price, are part of it.
All the results of the studies mentioned in this part of our
article may be considered as a proof that marketing
actions lead to placebo effects.
NEUROMARKETING AT THE HEART OF THE BRAND
The exploration of neural circuits aimed at identifying a
preference towards a brand has been the center of
research that made neuromarketing better known.
McClure et al. (2004) have published the results of a
study of two sodas of different brands (Coke and Pepsi).
The research protocol consisted in registering, using
fMRI, the brain activity of subjects during two types of
tasting tests: a blind test and a labeled test.
The results of the study have surprised researchers
and a large public and have created a big sensation.
Indeed, this study has shown that there could be parallel
mechanisms in the brain able to biaise the preference.
Two separate systems are involved in generating
preference for a brand: the ventromedial prefrontal cortex
(VMPFC) when judgments are based solely on sensory
information (taste in the case of soda); the hippocampus,
dorsolateral prefrontal cortex and the midbrain when
judgments are based respectively on sensory and cultural
informations (significantly more activation for Coke).
The ventromedial prefrontal cortex is an area of the
brain which is strongly implicated in signaling basic
appetitive aspects of reward (McClure et al., 2004).
During the blind tests, this region reflects the “cerebral
preference” (Droulers and Roullet, 2006) towards one of
the two brands. However, knowing the mark tasted
shuffles that preference. Different areas take part in the
process when tasting Coke, specially the hippocampus,
the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex and midbrain. These
areas don’t have a significant activation when tasting
Pepsi. The dorsolateral prefrontal cortex is typically
implicated in aspects of cognitive control, including
working memory (Robertson et al., 2001). It even might
have monitored the outcome of goal-directed behaviour
(Watanabe, 1996). Located in the heart of the limbic lobe,
and according to its interconnections with the cingulate
cortex and the mammillary bodies, it is acknowledged
that the hippocampus interferes in the emotional
treatments and in the memory (Gazzaniga et al., 2001). It
would be implied in the recollection of episodic
autobiographical memories (Viard et al., 2007) and
contribute to the retrieval of events.
Hence, giving subjects informations related to the mark
has constituted a bias for preference. The activation of
the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex and the hippocampus
prove that the preference for a brand can change. So,
preference becomes a matter of behavior; and behavior
is not always in line with the “cerebral preference”.
Specifically, the preference for a brand is not only based
on intrinsic components of product. The "branding" plays
a key role in the mechanism of preference. This directly
influences the buying behavior and loyalty.
NEUROMARKETING, A DISCIPLINE LITTLE KNOWN
AND USED
Already in 2004, while the neuromarketing was just born,
Gary Ruskin, executive director of Commercial Alert, U.S.
consumer association, has lauched the alarm about the
use of brain imaging techniques for a mercantile purpose.
Ruskin sent letters to members of the U.S. Senate
Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation,
requesting an investigation of neuromarketing and its
implications for politics and public health
(www.commercialalert.org). According to him, neuromarketing
would constitute a big danger for the
consumer. This one could be manipulated by marketing
agencies without even being aware of it. More than that,
the neuromarketing could – according to Ruskin – attack
the political world and influence the vote in favor of one
candidate or another. So the future of nations would be
compromised. We could share this opinion by supposing
that the use of neuromarketing by some companies
would be a big danger for public health. We could indeed
assist to a growth of some diseases such as obesity,
diabetes, alcoholism or lung cancer if junk food, alcohol
or tobacco companies would use neuromarketing in their
commercial strategies.
Probably, neuromarketing suffers from ethical limits
that are a barrier to its development. Beyond the ethical
side, the low use of neuromarketing is also due to other
types of limits. First, we found methodological limits.
Research protocols in neuromarketing are long and
difficult to elaborate. The number of subjects is generally
weak and the answers they give must be important and
clear enough to allow a significant statistical treatment.
Some techniques used in neuromarketing (such as fMRI)
can be unpleasant or uncomfortable for the subjects
(noise, claustrophobia, ...). Second, neuromarketing
suffer from financial limits. Indeed, the cost of using brain
imaging techniques remains high. A neuromarketing
study based on ten people can cost 50 thousand dollars
or more. The high price of techniques is a major handicap
to the progress of neuromarketing. Finally, we have legal
limits. Neuromarketing studies require a certain number
of procedures since the subjects are submitted to brain
imaging techniques. The agreement of an ethics
committee, the wise consent of subjects as well as the
assignment of a doctor as a supervisor is necessary to
the conformity of the study.
The emergence of new denominations including the
prefix "neuro" (neuroeconomics, neuromarketing, neurocriminalité,
neurorecrutement, etc.) may suggest that the
combination of neuroscience with other disciplines is a
fashion phenomenon, of which would benefit mainly
neuroscientists who are adepts of the movement and
also advertisers. There can really be some abuses in the
use of the term "neuro". There are probably some offices
and agencies which use the term as their livelihood; and
their targets are generally business leaders who are
eager for gain and in search of perpetual success. But
this is not a generality. Neuroeconomics and neuromarketing
are also fields of interest to a lot of researchers
and academicians who are not concerned by economical
and financial issues. They only hope to exploit the
technological progress in order to better their science.
This is not the first time we witness an alliance between
researchers in life sciences and social sciences.
Neuromarketing has often been despised by literature
and the leaders of opinion. However, wouldn’t it be
appropriate to consider it as an emerging discipline that
uses advanced technology in order to better satisfy the
consumer. A consumer who doesn’t eat only fast food,
sodas or cars. He also needs to live in a clean environment,
to lower the rate of illiteracy, corruption, cancers
and obesity. In that way, searchers can study neuromarketing
while respecting the ethical constraints which
Touhami et al. 1531
they face. In these cases, it would be a matter of
exploring the brain of the consumer or the citizen so as to
push him to perform benefic acts for the well-being of
society. The most promising application of neuroimaging
methods to marketing may come before a product is even
released, when it is just an idea being developed (Ariely
and Berns, 2010).
CONCLUSION
Throughout our article, we have tried to give a brief
outline of neuromarketing; this new discipline that
combines neuroscience and marketing. After giving a
definition of neuromarketing and mentioning the different
medical techniques which are connected with it, we have
tried to understand the link between the consumer's
neuroscience and the reward system. Following this, we
have devoted a part of the article to explain the
importance of the marketing placebo effect on the
consumer’s behavior. Neuromarketing has various fields
of application. In the third part of this paper, we have
chosen to talk about its application in understanding the
mechanism of preference in presence of a strong brand
image. Finally, in the last part, we have tempted to
explain the different reasons that let neuromarketing
positioned at an embryonic stage.
We do not pretend, through this article, to have
surrounded neuromarketing in all its dimensions. We only
hope it will be a means of research towards the use of
discipline for less commercial purposes. Neuromarketing
can be an effective way to convey sensitizing messages
for social comfort and sustainable development.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
We thank Merck Sorono Laboratories for their help in
ensuring this article is published.
REFERENCES
Ariely D, Berns GS 2010. Neuromarketing: the hope and hype of
neuroimaging in business. Nature Rev. Neurosci., 11: 284-292.
Berns GS (2005). Price, placebo, and the brain. J. Mark. Res., 42: 399-
400.
Droulers O, Roullet B (2006). Neuromarketing: Cadre théorique et
perspectives. Paper present end at the XXII° Congres of the French
Marketing Association, 11-12 may Nantes, France.
Erk S, Spitzer M, Wunderlich AP, Galley L, Walter H (2002). Cultural
objects modulate reward circuitry. Neuro Rep., 13: 2499-2503.
Gazzaniga MS, Ivry RB, Mangun GR (2001). Neurosciences Cognitives.
La biologie de l’esprit. Paris : De Boeck Université.
Guy-Coichard C, Boureau F (2005). Comprendre l’effet placebo pour
mieux traiter la douleur. La revue de médecine interne., 26: 226-232.
Irmak C, Block LG, Fitzsimons GJ (2005). The placebo effect in
marketing: sometimes you just have to want it to work. J. Mark. Res.,
42: 406-409.
Karama S, Lecours AR, Leroux JM, Bourgouin P, Beaudoin G, Joubert
S, Beauregard M (2002). Areas of brain activation in males and
females during viewing of erotic film excerpts. Hum. Brain Map.,
16(1): 1-13.
1532 Afr. J. Bus. Manage.
Kenning P, Plassmann H (2005) Neuroeconomics: an overview from an
economic perspective. Brain Res. Bull., 67: 343-354.
Lee N, Broderick AJ, Chamberlain L (2007). What is neuromarketing? A
discussion and agenda for future research. Int. J. Psychophysiol., 63:
199-204.
McClure SM, Li J, Tomlin D, Cypert KS, Montague LM, Montague PR
(2004) Neural correlates of behavioral preference for culturally
familiar drinks. Neuron, 44: 379-387.
Morgan D, Grant KA, Gage HD, Mach RH, Kaplan JR, Prioleau O,
Nader SH, Buchheimer N, Ehrenkaufer RL, Nader MA (2002). Social
dominance in monkeys : dopamine D2 receptors and cocaïne selfadministration.
Nature Neurosci., 5: 169-174.
Peterson RL (2005). The neuroscience of investing: fMRI of the reward
system. Brain Res. Bull., 67: 391-397.
Phillips AG, Brooke SM, Fibiger HC (1975). Effects of amphetamine
isomers and neuroleptics on self-stimulation from the nucleus
accumbens and dorsal noradrenergic bundle. Brain Res., 85: 13-22.
Plassmann H, O’Deherty J, Shiv B, Rangel A (2008). Marketing actions
can modulate neural representations of experienced pleasantness.
Proceed. National Acad. Sci., 105: 1050-1054.
Robertson EM, Tormos JM, Maeda F, Pascual-Leone A (2001). The
role of the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex during sequence learning is
specific for spatial information. Cerebral Cortex, 11: 628-635.
Rustichini A (2005) Neuroeconomics: present and future. Games Econ.
Behav., 52: 201-212.
Schultz W, Apicella P, Scarnati E, Ljungberg T (1992). Neural activity in
monkey ventral striatum related to expectation of reward. J.
Neurosci., 12: 4595-4610.
Schultz W (2004) Neural Coding of basic reward terms of animal
learning theory, game theory, microeconomics and behavioral
ecology. Curr. Opin. Neurobiol., 14: 139-147.
Shapiro AK (1964) Factors contributing to the placebo effect. Their
implications for psychotherapy. Am. J. Psychotherapy., 18: 73–88.
Shiv B, Carmon Z, Ariely D (2005) Placebo effects of marketing actions:
consumers may get what they pay for. J. Mark. Res., 42: 383-393.
Small DM, Zatorre RJ, Dagher A, Evans AC, Jones-Gotman M (2001)
Changes in brain activity related to eating chocolate: from pleasure to
aversion. Brain, 124: 1720-1733.
Stoll M, Baecke S, Kenning P (2008). What they see is what they get?
An fMRI-study on neural correlates of attractive packaging. J.
Consum. Behav., 7: 342-359.
Viard A, Piolino P, Desgranges B, Chételat G, Lebreton K, Landeau B,
Young A, De La Sayette V, Eustach F (2007). Hippocampal activation
for autobiographical memories over the entire lifetime in healthy aged
subjects: an fMRI study. Cerebral Cortex, 17: 2453-2467.
Watanabe M (1996). Reward expectancy in primate prefrontal neurons.
Nature, 382: 629-632.
Zak PJ (2004). Neuroeconomics. Philosophical Transactions of the
Royal Society B, 359: 1737-1748.
Available online at http://www.academicjournals.org/AJBM
ISSN 1993-8233 ©2011 Academic Journals
Review
Neuromarketing: Where marketing and neuroscience
meet
Zineb Ouazzani Touhami1,2*, Larbi Benlafkih1, Mohamed Jiddane3,5, Yahya Cherrah5, Hadj
Omar EL Malki2,5,6 and Ali Benomar2,4,5,6
1Education Sciences School, University Mohammed Vth Souissi, Rabat, Morocco.
2Medical Center of Clinical Trials and Epidemiological Study (CRECET), Medical School, University Mohammed Vth
Souissi, Rabat, Morocco.
3Radiology Department, Hôpital des Spécialités, Rabat, Morocco.
4Neurology Department « B », Hôpital des Spécialités, Rabat, Morocco.
5Medical School, University Mohammed Vth Souissi, Rabat, Morocco.
6Biostatical, clinical research and epidemiological laboratory (LBRCE), Medical School, University Mohammed Vth
Souissi, Rabat, Morocco
Accepted 30 November, 2010
Neuromarketing is a new field where brain science and marketing meet. The emergence of brain
imaging encourages marketers to use high-tech imaging techniques to resolve marketing issues.
Marketers and advertisers have exploited the results of many brain imaging studies to know what could
drives consumer’s behavior. They have found out that some marketing actions can generate added
satisfaction in a placebo-like manner. The findings of the human reward system studies also play an
important role in neuromarketing research. The number of neuromarketing studies is growing and the
findings are important for marketing research. However neuromarketing suffers from many limits that
are a barrier to its development. Through this article, we attempt to give an overview on neuromarketing
and its neural correlates while provide a perspective toward the use of field for less commercial
purposes.
Key words: Neuromarketing, neuroscience, marketing, reward system, marketing placebo effect.
INTRODUCTION
Recent years have seen an emergence in the abilities of
neuroscientists to study cortical activity in terms of
frequency and discoveries. Indeed, the recent techniques
of functional imaging have permitted a deep knowledge in
neuroscience and a precision of brain areas responsible
for some pleasures and emotions. However, most social
sciences have yet to adopt neuroimaging as a standard
tool or procedure for research and marketing research
has been far slower to wake up to the benefits of this
technique (Lee et al., 2007). Economists were the first to
propose the "neuroeconomics" (Zak, 2004; Kenning and
Plassmann, 2005; Rustitchini, 2005). The aim was to
better understand the decision process of economical
*Corresponding author. E-mail: ouazzani_zineb@hotmail.com.
agents decision to approaches of cognitive psychology
and neuroscience (Droulers and Roullet, 2006). Recent
years have seen the development of a new discipline
which can be labeled as “neuromarketing” or “consumer
neuroscience”. The goal of this emerging discipline is the
transfer of insights from neurology to research in
consumer behavior by applying neuroscientific methods
to marketing relevant problems (Stoll et al., 2008). Thus,
we can consider that the neuromarketing is where
neuroscience and marketing meet.
Different techniques are used in neuromarketing.
Among them, we have the positron emission tomography
(PET), the functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI),
the electroencephalography (EEG), the
magnetoencephalography (MEG) and the galvanic skin
response (GSR). Even if these techniques remain
expensive and unavailable, the use of the EEG and the
GSR are most current in marketing research. Since the
birth of neuromarketing, researchers have more focused
on some fields like the impact of advertisements and their
memory. Also, in order to realize "neuromarketing"
studies, some specialized agencies were born: Neuroco
and Neurosense in UK, BrightHouse Neurostrategies and
NeuroInsights in USA, PHD Media in Canada, SalesBrain
in France, Neuro Insight in Australia and a lot more.
Among these agencies, some really experience such
studies, but others don’t having no recourse to scientific
techniques used in neuromarketing.
In this article we suggest studying neuromarketing
through different angles. First, we will try to understand
the link between neuromarketing and the humans reward
system. Then, we’ll point to the importance of the placebo
effect in neuromarketing before tackling with the branding
(application that has done most to know neuromarketing).
Hence, throughout this paper, we will give an overview of
the achieved works previously in this domain. Finally,
we’ll raise the controversy around neuromarketing, which
is still at an embryonic stage till nowadays. The objective
here is to make neuromarketing better known, and to
explain the existence of some psychological phenomena
through scientific and objective notions.
NEUROMARKETING AND REWARD SYSTEM
Placed at the heart of the midbrain, the reward system is
necessary to the survival of animals and humans. Its
functioning is due the motivation which pushes to
accomplish simple actions or behaviors as looking for
food or reproduction, to more complex actions like the
choice of an object, a brand or an investment. Neurobiologically,
reward is mediated by dopaminergic systems
involving the ventral striatum which includes the ventral
tegmental area (VTA), nucleus accumbens and
amygdala. This reward system that induces subjective
feelings of pleasure and contributes to positive emotions
is the same as the one activated when consuming some
drugs - especially cocaine – bringing about addiction. So,
some people become addicted to certain brands, tastes
and products. Several studies were conducted on rats
(Phillips et al., 1975) and on monkeys (Schultz et al.,
1992; Morgan et al., 2002; Schultz, 2004). The activity of
dopaminergic neurons in the nucleus accumbens has
been shown to increase their activity by selfadministration
of cocaine or after the presentation of
liquid or solid rewards. It’s the same thing after the
presentation of stimuli predicting the reward.
Erk et al. (2002) have studied the rewarding properties
of cultural objects, mainly cars. The choice of such a
category of products is not anodyne; cars can effectively
reflect a degree of wealth and social domination.
Compared to small cars and limousines, sports cars was
considered more attractive, causing more activation in
ventral striatum, orbitofrontal cortex, anterior cingulated
Touhami et al. 1529
and occipital regions. Therefore, the subjects have felt a
higher potential reward when viewing a sports car image;
the sign of domination and of a high social rank.
Money is also a strong stimulus which can easily
activate the human reward system. Nowadays, the notion
of money is strongly assimilated to that of finance and
investment. Recently, financial theories has been greatly
enhanced by the study of investor psychology and
behavior. The application of knowledge in cognitive
neuroscience and neuroimaging has widely contributed
that. Indeed, fMRI findings offer the opportunity to discern
the fundamental neural processes that drive rational and
irrational investor behavior. In an article published by
Peterson (2007), the author discusses implications of one
aspect of the relationship between the brain and the
financial markets – the brain’s “reward system approach”.
Thus, it was found that rewards activate the brain much
differently than losses, both during anticipation and
receipt (gain or loss). Indeed, the anticipation or expectation
of receiving monetary rewards primarily active the
nucleus accumbens (NACC), while receiving or enjoying
a reward active the medial prefrontal cortex (MPFC).
Moreover, anticipation of increasing reward magnitude
increasingly activates the NACC, while increasing reward
outcomes increasingly activate the MPFC.
Additionally, the level of NACC activation decreases
after reward outcome to a level either slightly below
baseline if the anticipated reward is received and to
significantly below baseline if the anticipated reward is
not received. In his study, Peterson had a wider sight by
linking the reward system with the personality, the
impulse, the affect and the good mood of the investor.
Along with cultural objects and money, neuroimaging
studies have shown that the ventral striatum may also be
activated during the presentation of more natural rewards
such as sexual stimuli (Karama et al., 2002) or food
(Small et al., 2001).
THE MARKETING PLACEBO EFFECT
Towards the end of the 18th century, the term "placebo" (
"I shall please") takes its medical sense and will be the
prescription given to please and satisfy the therapeutic
desire of a patient (Guy-Coichard and Boureau, 2005).
Shapiro (1964) defined the placebo as “any therapeutic
procedure (or a component of any therapeutic procedure)
which is given deliberately to have an effect or
unknowingly and has an effect on a symptom, syndrom,
disease, or patient but which is objectively without
specific activity for the condition being treated”. This
same author has defined the placebo effect as “the
therapeutic effect produced by a placebo”.
Since a few years, the placebo effect is not only
connected with the medical field. Shiv et al. (2005)
document for the first time that non-conscious expectations
about the relationship between price and quality
1530 Afr. J. Bus. Manage.
can influence consumers in a placebo-like manner. Some
marketing actions, such as changes in the price, can
affect neural representations on experienced
pleasantness and on the efficacy of consumed products.
Authors have shown, out of three experiences, that
consumers who pay a less high price for a given product
can take smallest advantage when consuming it, in
comparison with consumers who paid a higher price.
These results were reinforced later by Plassmann et al.
(2008) who proved that increasing the price of a same
wine increases subjective reports of flavor pleasantness
(stated preference) as well as BOLD (Blood-oxygen-level
dependent) activity in medial orbitofrontal cortex, an area
that is widely thought to encode for experienced
pleasantness during experiential tasks. The use of
functional imaging techniques let go the placebo effect
passes out of the subjective realm of being "all in the
head" into something real and measurable.
Notably, a highly motivation and expectation play an
important role in marketing placebo effect. The vast
majority of imaging on the placebo effect has focused on
the lessening of painful stimuli through suggestion. Even
without placebos, mere expectation (or anticipation)
alters the processing of tactile stimuli (Berns, 2005).
Irmak et al. (2005) conducted a study on the placebo
effect for an energy drink. They found that the placebo
effect manifests only for consumers who desire (high
motivation) the arousing effects of an energy drink. The
placebo energy drink was capable of raising blood
pressure, increasing physical reflexes, enhancing mental
alertness, and raising the self-reported arousal level for
the participants. In particular, these effects were only
observed for highly motivated subjects who read
informations about the energy drink purportedly
excerpted from a prestigious newspaper.
Till the studies of Shiv et al. (2005), the placebo effect
was presumed as a conscious mechanism. These
authors suggest that kinds of placebo effects can done
without catching conscience. The extrinsic components of
products, especially the price, are part of it.
All the results of the studies mentioned in this part of our
article may be considered as a proof that marketing
actions lead to placebo effects.
NEUROMARKETING AT THE HEART OF THE BRAND
The exploration of neural circuits aimed at identifying a
preference towards a brand has been the center of
research that made neuromarketing better known.
McClure et al. (2004) have published the results of a
study of two sodas of different brands (Coke and Pepsi).
The research protocol consisted in registering, using
fMRI, the brain activity of subjects during two types of
tasting tests: a blind test and a labeled test.
The results of the study have surprised researchers
and a large public and have created a big sensation.
Indeed, this study has shown that there could be parallel
mechanisms in the brain able to biaise the preference.
Two separate systems are involved in generating
preference for a brand: the ventromedial prefrontal cortex
(VMPFC) when judgments are based solely on sensory
information (taste in the case of soda); the hippocampus,
dorsolateral prefrontal cortex and the midbrain when
judgments are based respectively on sensory and cultural
informations (significantly more activation for Coke).
The ventromedial prefrontal cortex is an area of the
brain which is strongly implicated in signaling basic
appetitive aspects of reward (McClure et al., 2004).
During the blind tests, this region reflects the “cerebral
preference” (Droulers and Roullet, 2006) towards one of
the two brands. However, knowing the mark tasted
shuffles that preference. Different areas take part in the
process when tasting Coke, specially the hippocampus,
the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex and midbrain. These
areas don’t have a significant activation when tasting
Pepsi. The dorsolateral prefrontal cortex is typically
implicated in aspects of cognitive control, including
working memory (Robertson et al., 2001). It even might
have monitored the outcome of goal-directed behaviour
(Watanabe, 1996). Located in the heart of the limbic lobe,
and according to its interconnections with the cingulate
cortex and the mammillary bodies, it is acknowledged
that the hippocampus interferes in the emotional
treatments and in the memory (Gazzaniga et al., 2001). It
would be implied in the recollection of episodic
autobiographical memories (Viard et al., 2007) and
contribute to the retrieval of events.
Hence, giving subjects informations related to the mark
has constituted a bias for preference. The activation of
the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex and the hippocampus
prove that the preference for a brand can change. So,
preference becomes a matter of behavior; and behavior
is not always in line with the “cerebral preference”.
Specifically, the preference for a brand is not only based
on intrinsic components of product. The "branding" plays
a key role in the mechanism of preference. This directly
influences the buying behavior and loyalty.
NEUROMARKETING, A DISCIPLINE LITTLE KNOWN
AND USED
Already in 2004, while the neuromarketing was just born,
Gary Ruskin, executive director of Commercial Alert, U.S.
consumer association, has lauched the alarm about the
use of brain imaging techniques for a mercantile purpose.
Ruskin sent letters to members of the U.S. Senate
Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation,
requesting an investigation of neuromarketing and its
implications for politics and public health
(www.commercialalert.org). According to him, neuromarketing
would constitute a big danger for the
consumer. This one could be manipulated by marketing
agencies without even being aware of it. More than that,
the neuromarketing could – according to Ruskin – attack
the political world and influence the vote in favor of one
candidate or another. So the future of nations would be
compromised. We could share this opinion by supposing
that the use of neuromarketing by some companies
would be a big danger for public health. We could indeed
assist to a growth of some diseases such as obesity,
diabetes, alcoholism or lung cancer if junk food, alcohol
or tobacco companies would use neuromarketing in their
commercial strategies.
Probably, neuromarketing suffers from ethical limits
that are a barrier to its development. Beyond the ethical
side, the low use of neuromarketing is also due to other
types of limits. First, we found methodological limits.
Research protocols in neuromarketing are long and
difficult to elaborate. The number of subjects is generally
weak and the answers they give must be important and
clear enough to allow a significant statistical treatment.
Some techniques used in neuromarketing (such as fMRI)
can be unpleasant or uncomfortable for the subjects
(noise, claustrophobia, ...). Second, neuromarketing
suffer from financial limits. Indeed, the cost of using brain
imaging techniques remains high. A neuromarketing
study based on ten people can cost 50 thousand dollars
or more. The high price of techniques is a major handicap
to the progress of neuromarketing. Finally, we have legal
limits. Neuromarketing studies require a certain number
of procedures since the subjects are submitted to brain
imaging techniques. The agreement of an ethics
committee, the wise consent of subjects as well as the
assignment of a doctor as a supervisor is necessary to
the conformity of the study.
The emergence of new denominations including the
prefix "neuro" (neuroeconomics, neuromarketing, neurocriminalité,
neurorecrutement, etc.) may suggest that the
combination of neuroscience with other disciplines is a
fashion phenomenon, of which would benefit mainly
neuroscientists who are adepts of the movement and
also advertisers. There can really be some abuses in the
use of the term "neuro". There are probably some offices
and agencies which use the term as their livelihood; and
their targets are generally business leaders who are
eager for gain and in search of perpetual success. But
this is not a generality. Neuroeconomics and neuromarketing
are also fields of interest to a lot of researchers
and academicians who are not concerned by economical
and financial issues. They only hope to exploit the
technological progress in order to better their science.
This is not the first time we witness an alliance between
researchers in life sciences and social sciences.
Neuromarketing has often been despised by literature
and the leaders of opinion. However, wouldn’t it be
appropriate to consider it as an emerging discipline that
uses advanced technology in order to better satisfy the
consumer. A consumer who doesn’t eat only fast food,
sodas or cars. He also needs to live in a clean environment,
to lower the rate of illiteracy, corruption, cancers
and obesity. In that way, searchers can study neuromarketing
while respecting the ethical constraints which
Touhami et al. 1531
they face. In these cases, it would be a matter of
exploring the brain of the consumer or the citizen so as to
push him to perform benefic acts for the well-being of
society. The most promising application of neuroimaging
methods to marketing may come before a product is even
released, when it is just an idea being developed (Ariely
and Berns, 2010).
CONCLUSION
Throughout our article, we have tried to give a brief
outline of neuromarketing; this new discipline that
combines neuroscience and marketing. After giving a
definition of neuromarketing and mentioning the different
medical techniques which are connected with it, we have
tried to understand the link between the consumer's
neuroscience and the reward system. Following this, we
have devoted a part of the article to explain the
importance of the marketing placebo effect on the
consumer’s behavior. Neuromarketing has various fields
of application. In the third part of this paper, we have
chosen to talk about its application in understanding the
mechanism of preference in presence of a strong brand
image. Finally, in the last part, we have tempted to
explain the different reasons that let neuromarketing
positioned at an embryonic stage.
We do not pretend, through this article, to have
surrounded neuromarketing in all its dimensions. We only
hope it will be a means of research towards the use of
discipline for less commercial purposes. Neuromarketing
can be an effective way to convey sensitizing messages
for social comfort and sustainable development.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
We thank Merck Sorono Laboratories for their help in
ensuring this article is published.
REFERENCES
Ariely D, Berns GS 2010. Neuromarketing: the hope and hype of
neuroimaging in business. Nature Rev. Neurosci., 11: 284-292.
Berns GS (2005). Price, placebo, and the brain. J. Mark. Res., 42: 399-
400.
Droulers O, Roullet B (2006). Neuromarketing: Cadre théorique et
perspectives. Paper present end at the XXII° Congres of the French
Marketing Association, 11-12 may Nantes, France.
Erk S, Spitzer M, Wunderlich AP, Galley L, Walter H (2002). Cultural
objects modulate reward circuitry. Neuro Rep., 13: 2499-2503.
Gazzaniga MS, Ivry RB, Mangun GR (2001). Neurosciences Cognitives.
La biologie de l’esprit. Paris : De Boeck Université.
Guy-Coichard C, Boureau F (2005). Comprendre l’effet placebo pour
mieux traiter la douleur. La revue de médecine interne., 26: 226-232.
Irmak C, Block LG, Fitzsimons GJ (2005). The placebo effect in
marketing: sometimes you just have to want it to work. J. Mark. Res.,
42: 406-409.
Karama S, Lecours AR, Leroux JM, Bourgouin P, Beaudoin G, Joubert
S, Beauregard M (2002). Areas of brain activation in males and
females during viewing of erotic film excerpts. Hum. Brain Map.,
16(1): 1-13.
1532 Afr. J. Bus. Manage.
Kenning P, Plassmann H (2005) Neuroeconomics: an overview from an
economic perspective. Brain Res. Bull., 67: 343-354.
Lee N, Broderick AJ, Chamberlain L (2007). What is neuromarketing? A
discussion and agenda for future research. Int. J. Psychophysiol., 63:
199-204.
McClure SM, Li J, Tomlin D, Cypert KS, Montague LM, Montague PR
(2004) Neural correlates of behavioral preference for culturally
familiar drinks. Neuron, 44: 379-387.
Morgan D, Grant KA, Gage HD, Mach RH, Kaplan JR, Prioleau O,
Nader SH, Buchheimer N, Ehrenkaufer RL, Nader MA (2002). Social
dominance in monkeys : dopamine D2 receptors and cocaïne selfadministration.
Nature Neurosci., 5: 169-174.
Peterson RL (2005). The neuroscience of investing: fMRI of the reward
system. Brain Res. Bull., 67: 391-397.
Phillips AG, Brooke SM, Fibiger HC (1975). Effects of amphetamine
isomers and neuroleptics on self-stimulation from the nucleus
accumbens and dorsal noradrenergic bundle. Brain Res., 85: 13-22.
Plassmann H, O’Deherty J, Shiv B, Rangel A (2008). Marketing actions
can modulate neural representations of experienced pleasantness.
Proceed. National Acad. Sci., 105: 1050-1054.
Robertson EM, Tormos JM, Maeda F, Pascual-Leone A (2001). The
role of the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex during sequence learning is
specific for spatial information. Cerebral Cortex, 11: 628-635.
Rustichini A (2005) Neuroeconomics: present and future. Games Econ.
Behav., 52: 201-212.
Schultz W, Apicella P, Scarnati E, Ljungberg T (1992). Neural activity in
monkey ventral striatum related to expectation of reward. J.
Neurosci., 12: 4595-4610.
Schultz W (2004) Neural Coding of basic reward terms of animal
learning theory, game theory, microeconomics and behavioral
ecology. Curr. Opin. Neurobiol., 14: 139-147.
Shapiro AK (1964) Factors contributing to the placebo effect. Their
implications for psychotherapy. Am. J. Psychotherapy., 18: 73–88.
Shiv B, Carmon Z, Ariely D (2005) Placebo effects of marketing actions:
consumers may get what they pay for. J. Mark. Res., 42: 383-393.
Small DM, Zatorre RJ, Dagher A, Evans AC, Jones-Gotman M (2001)
Changes in brain activity related to eating chocolate: from pleasure to
aversion. Brain, 124: 1720-1733.
Stoll M, Baecke S, Kenning P (2008). What they see is what they get?
An fMRI-study on neural correlates of attractive packaging. J.
Consum. Behav., 7: 342-359.
Viard A, Piolino P, Desgranges B, Chételat G, Lebreton K, Landeau B,
Young A, De La Sayette V, Eustach F (2007). Hippocampal activation
for autobiographical memories over the entire lifetime in healthy aged
subjects: an fMRI study. Cerebral Cortex, 17: 2453-2467.
Watanabe M (1996). Reward expectancy in primate prefrontal neurons.
Nature, 382: 629-632.
Zak PJ (2004). Neuroeconomics. Philosophical Transactions of the
Royal Society B, 359: 1737-1748.
No comments:
Post a Comment