Neuroscience in IndustryNeuroscience in Industry

Professor Gemma CalvertProfessor Gemma Calvert

What is “Neuromarketing”

• Term broadly used to describe the application of tools tasks/tests derived from the fields of cognitive psychology and neuroscience to measure biological (as opposed to psychological) reactions to (marketing) stimuli

Roughly speaking – basic consumer research

using modern tools

What is “Neuromarketing”

• Measure brain/neural responses

• Implicit or direct responses (vs explicit/spoken)

• Where those “stimuli” are:

• Marketing strategies

• Communications

• Advertising

• New products

• Existing products

Why does industry need

neuroscience?

“The trouble with market research

is that consumers

don’t think how they feel,

they don’t say what they think,

and they don’t do what they say”

Estimated 80%+ new products fail in Year 1….

“In 2002, an estimated US$ 6.8 billion was spent on conventional marketing research tools in the US alone. This is an enormous amount of money considering that there is little scientific evidence to support the widespread use of focus groups.” (Mast & Zaltmann, Brain Research Bulletin, 2005)

“There is evidence that as much as 80% of all market research is confirmatory” (Barabba et al, 1991)

Traditional Market Research

Focus Groups• Group dynamics• Moderator bias

Observation• Behavioural change• Little control• Subjective interpretation

of behaviour

Surveys• Leading questions• Sensitivity• Inaccurate answers• Selective responses

Confounding Effects

What can Neuroscience offer?

Rigorously Controlled

Environment

Taps Implicit Processes

(as opposed to explicit)

Objective

What type of companies are using

these tools?

• Global packaged goods

• Flavour and fragrance houses

• Media owners and planners

• Advertising agencies

• Pharmaceuticals

• Digital gaming and services

• Brains are more direct predictors of behaviour

• Brains absorb much more than what we are “conscious” of (spotlight of attention)

• Emotions are key drivers of behaviour – easy to image in the brain, hard to articulate

• Brains are less noisy than human speech (behave more similarly)

• Better business decisions from better understanding

What’s the interest in

neuroscience?

Current Applications

• Measuring effectiveness of communications (public messages)

• Neuroergonomics (human-machine interface)

• De-risking marketing decisions

• Evaluation of traditional market research tools

• Validation of focus group output

• Patents (back-up product claims)

• PR opportunities (profile, talking point entry)

Case study: evaluation of planned brand extensions

BRIEF

• Use fMRI to predict the likely success of two possible brand extensions

• Existing brand: successful personal care product

• Planned extension categories: homecare & babycare

• Subjects: Mothers 18-45 with children under 3 yrs

• Compare with post-scanning questionnaire

• Client: Unilever

Existing Brand Competitor Brands in the Planned Extension Markets

Mock-up versions of the existing Brand into the planned new markets

Mock-ups of the planned brand extensions were generated by an illustrator prior to scanning

Planned extension A Babycare sector

Planned extension B Babycare sector

AMYGDALA (SALIENCY)

-0.4

-0.3

-0.2

-0.1

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

1 2 3

% S

IGN

AL C

HA

NG

E

O R B IT O FR O N T AL C O R T EX

(PLEASAN T N ESS O F ST IM U LI)

-0 .6

-0 .5

-0 .4

-0 .3

-0 .2

-0 .1

0

0 .1

0 .2

0 .3

1 2 3

% S

IGN

AL

CH

AN

GE

IN SU LA C O R T EX

(T AST E C O R T EX - D ISG U ST )

-0 .3

-0 .2

-0 .1

0

0 .1

0 .2

0 .3

0 .4

0 .5

0 .6

1 2 3

% S

IGN

AL

CH

AN

GE

VISU AL C O R T EX

(VISU AL PER C EPT IO N AT T EN T IO N )

0

0.5

1

1 .5

1 2 3

% S

IGN

AL

CH

AN

GE

KEY:

1: Existing brand

2: Brand Ext 1

3. Brand Ext 2

(failed in USA)

FMRI indicates response to planned brand extension 1 is very similar to successful brand. Brand extension 2 shows the opposite pattern.

There are no differences in visual attention areas to all 3 conditions so the differences seen in preference areas not due to superficial differences in mock-up design. Post-scan explicit questionnaires revealed no sig diffs between all 3 conditions.

Neuroscience & Public CampaignsNeuroscience & Public Campaigns

MaterialsPacks Packs with

warnings

SponsorshipBillboard ads

Promotional items

The same conditions were included for Marlboro Cigarettes

© Neurosense Limited, UK 2008

• Are Government Health Warnings on cigarette packets effective, or do they in fact do more harm than good?

• Following the ban on cigarette advertising on TV etc, tobacco companies are using more insidious methods of advertising

• Have they tapped into a more effective but insidious method of advertising?

Ad formatAd formatAd formatAd format

desiredesiredesiredesire **

ADVISING GOVERNMENT PUBLIC HEALTH CAMPAIGNS

In contrast to the government’s aim to reduce cigarette smoking, warning

labels FAIL to reduce the response of the brain’s nicotine craving area. Our

data show that warning labels actually induce further craving, particularly in

those people who say they are most affected by warning labels…

activity in craving areas of the brain for packs with warnings

compared to packs without warnings

-1.00

-0.80

-0.60

-0.40

-0.20

0.00

0.20

0.40

0.60

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

self rating of warning label effect

bra

in a

cti

vit

y c

han

ge i

n c

ravin

g a

rea

The correlation between rating and activity in the ventral striatum/nucleus accumbens in this graph is .44, and significant at p < .05. In other words, in those people who are most aware of warning labels (ratings 4-7), these labels induce craving to a greater degree than those who ignore them.

Public health advice from

industry sources

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

Dehydration Control

% C

ha

ng

e in

La

tera

l V

en

tric

ula

r

Vo

lum

e

Kempton et al, 2010

Evaluation of marketing activity

• Evaluation of the relative effectiveness of different media formats (TV, print, radio)

• Measurement of advertisement effectiveness in:

– different dayparts (GMTV)

– different sectors in ad break (Viacom)

– different programming contexts (Viacom)

• Pre-testing of concept boards

Simultaneous Eye Tracking and FMRISimultaneous Simultaneous eyetrackingeyetracking and FMRIand FMRI

How is neuroscience adding

value?• De-risk marketing decisions

• Bolster/validate/improve traditional research tools

• Pre-testing of animatics/storyboards/prototypes

• Evidence to back product claims (patents)

• PR opportunities, profile raising

• Contribution to knowledge (brand equity, loyalty, value)

Are there ethical issues to answer?

• Technique is descriptive – still interrogating consumers as traditional methods

• All FMRI studies subject to scrutiny by public research ethics committees

• Group data maintains anonymity

• Brain imaging may help uncover existing drives or needs, but difficult to conceive that it would be able to invent ones

• The economic advantages are clear – refine and define new products with lower risk of failure

• Boost UK economy by harnessing the best science available

Thanks for listening and to the new digital era

that has made delivery of this talk possible!

Come and visit us at the International Digital Laboratory, University of Warwick