Perceptions of marketing academics, neurologists, and marketing professionals about neuromarketing

Abstract Neuromarketing uses the latest advances in brain scanning to learn more about the mental processes behind customer purchasing decisions. The purpose of this exploratory research was to reveal the perceptions of marketing academics, neurologists, and marketing professionals regarding neuromarketing studies, as they have an important role for the future of neuromarketing studies. Quantitative analysis was conducted on data from 111 marketing academics, 52 neurologists, and 56 marketing professionals. All participants agreed that neuromarketing is not a manipulative way of selling unnecessary goods and services. Three factors – interest and participation, knowledge and awareness, and ethics – were perceived as the most important aspects of neuromarketing according to the three groups of participants. Analyses of the perception of neuromarketing revealed that neurologists and marketing professionals perceive neuromarketing more favorably than marketing academics.

[1]  P. Kenning,et al.  NeuroEconomics: An overview from an economic perspective , 2005, Brain Research Bulletin.

[2]  Laura Chamberlain,et al.  What is "neuromarketing"? A discussion and agenda for future research. , 2007, International journal of psychophysiology : official journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology.

[3]  A. Gutchess,et al.  A Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Study of Neural Dissociations between Brand and Person Judgments , 2006 .

[4]  John R. Rossiter,et al.  Brain-Imaging Detection of Visual Scene Encoding in Long-term Memory for TV Commercials , 2001, Journal of Advertising Research.

[5]  W. Schwindt,et al.  Evidence for a neural correlate of a framing effect: Bias-specific activity in the ventromedial prefrontal cortex during credibility judgments , 2005, Brain Research Bulletin.

[6]  E. Sell.  [Functional magnetic resonance]. , 2007, Medicina.

[7]  Carlos Cabral-Cardoso,et al.  Too academic to get a proper job? The difficult transition of PhDs to the “real world” of industry , 2001 .

[8]  Samuel M. McClure,et al.  Neural Correlates of Behavioral Preference for Culturally Familiar Drinks , 2004, Neuron.

[9]  C. Fornell,et al.  Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. , 1981 .

[10]  Michael Brammer,et al.  Brain scam? , 2004, Nature Neuroscience.

[11]  S M Kosslyn,et al.  If neuroimaging is the answer, what is the question? , 1999, Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences.

[12]  Henrik Walter,et al.  Cultural objects modulate reward circuitry , 2002, Neuroreport.

[13]  Hilke Plassmann,et al.  Nonlinear Responses Within the Medial Prefrontal Cortex Reveal When Specific Implicit Information Influences Economic Decision Making , 2005, Journal of neuroimaging : official journal of the American Society of Neuroimaging.

[14]  Dan Acuff.  Taking the guesswork out of responsible marketing , 2005 .

[15]  C. Senior,et al.  Beauty in the Brain of the Beholder , 2003, Neuron.

[16]  Hilke Plassmann,et al.  Applications of functional magnetic resonance imaging for market research , 2007 .

[17]  Judy Illes,et al.  Neuroethics of neuromarketing , 2008 .

[18]  G. Loewenstein,et al.  Neural Predictors of Purchases , 2007, Neuron.

[19]  Hans-Jochen Heinze,et al.  Neural correlates of culturally familiar brands of car manufacturers , 2006, NeuroImage.

[20]  Prashanth U. Nyer,et al.  The role of emotions in marketing , 1999 .

[21]  Sidney Weinstein,et al.  Brain wave analysis in advertising research. Validation from basic research & independent replications , 1984 .

[22]  Carl Senior,et al.  Mapping the mind for the modern market researcher , 2007 .

[23]  Daniel Tranel,et al.  Preferring one taste over another without recognizing either , 2005, Nature Neuroscience.