Analysis of skin conductance response during evaluation of preferences for cosmetic products

We analyzed skin conductance response (SCR) as a psychophysiological index to evaluate affective aspects of consumer preferences for cosmetic products. To examine the test-retest reliability of association between preferences and SCR, we asked 33 female volunteers to complete two experimental sessions approximately 1 year apart. The participants indicated their preferences in a typical paired comparison task by choosing the better option from a combination of two products among four products. We measured anticipatory SCR prior to expressions of the preferences. We found that the mean amplitude of the SCR elicited by the preferred products was significantly larger than that elicited by the non-preferred products. The participants' preferences and corresponding SCR patterns were well preserved at the second session 1 year later. Our results supported cumulating findings that SCR is a useful index of consumer preferences that has future potential, both in laboratory and marketing settings.

[1]  J. Tsai,et al.  Gender differences in emotional response among European Americans and Hmong Americans , 2007 .

[2]  A. Damasio,et al.  Deciding Advantageously Before Knowing the Advantageous Strategy , 1997, Science.

[3]  Sameer Kumar,et al.  Exploratory analysis of global cosmetic industry: major players, technology and market trends , 2005 .

[4]  J. Avery.  Failure to respond. , 2007, The Journal of the Arkansas Medical Society.

[5]  A. Damasio,et al.  Failure to respond autonomically to anticipated future outcomes following damage to prefrontal cortex. , 1996, Cerebral cortex.

[6]  Monika Koller,et al.  Objective Measures of Emotion Related to Brand Attitude: A New Way to Quantify Emotion-Related Aspects Relevant to Marketing , 2011, PloS one.

[7]  Sean A. Spence,et al.  Descartes' Error: Emotion, Reason and the Human Brain , 1995 .

[8]  M. Bradley,et al.  Looking at pictures: affective, facial, visceral, and behavioral reactions. , 1993, Psychophysiology.

[9]  Nick Lee,et al.  Neuromarketing and consumer neuroscience: contributions to neurology , 2013, BMC Neurology.

[10]  Michael S. Minor,et al.  Validity, reliability, and applicability of psychophysiological techniques in marketing research , 2008 .

[11]  Ryan O. Murphy,et al.  Using Skin Conductance in Judgment and Decision Making Research , 2011 .

[12]  M. Bradley,et al.  Emotion and motivation II: sex differences in picture processing. , 2001, Emotion.

[13]  Scott A. Huettel,et al.  New Scanner Data for Brand Marketers: How Neuroscience Can Help Better Understand Differences in Brand Preferences , 2011 .

[14]  Rosalind W. Picard,et al.  Measuring Affective-Cognitive Experience and Predicting Market Success , 2014, IEEE Transactions on Affective Computing.

[15]  Ana Rojo.  The Role of Emotions , 2017 .

[16]  M. Bradley,et al.  Brain potentials in affective picture processing: covariation with autonomic arousal and affective report , 2000, Biological Psychology.

[17]  Eric T. Bradlow,et al.  Beyond conjoint analysis: Advances in preference measurement , 2008 .

[18]  V. Green,et al.  Self-Focus, Other-Focus, and Interpersonal Needs as Correlates of Loneliness 1 , 1993, Psychological reports.

[19]  W. Sommer,et al.  Emotions in Go/NoGo conflicts , 2009, Psychological research.

[20]  A. Lawrence,et al.  The somatic marker hypothesis: A critical evaluation , 2006, Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews.

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

[22]  Hye-Shin Kim,et al.  The relationship between consumer involvement and brand perceptions of female cosmetic consumers , 2009 .