Much has been written about the different demographics and views that Clinton and Trump supporters hold of our changing nation. Add to that now an indication that Clinton and Trump supporters may also differ in how they process messaging. In a new study, Trump supporters showed higher levels of positive emotional response and lower levels of negative emotional response than Clinton supporters when looking at apolitical bank advertising. Continue Reading →
Tag Archives | fEMG
In a new study of advertising content that combined both neuro-physiological measures and traditional copy test measures, G&R has found that the two assessment approaches can yield different guidance when evaluating copy effectiveness. Commercials with strong emotional activation as measured by facial electromyography (fEMG) may not have high recall or persuasion, and visa-versa. In other studies, we have found positive correlations between fEMG and recall or fEMG and persuasion. Continue Reading →
Facebook has conducted a series of studies to show the relative value of mobile advertising over television advertising. The studies are based on EEG.
Expedia has opened a dedicated neuroscience lab to look at what influences how people decide to travel. The Lab is based on fEMG.
What does the use of these two fundamentally different neuroscience measures by these two very successful companies say about the current state of applied neuroscience? Continue Reading →
One of the first issues that market researchers face when they start to think about neuro-physiological measurement is how to think about the small sample sizes. Survey research is usually based on samples in the hundreds or even in the thousands, but it is not uncommon for User Experience testing to be based on ten (10) people. In fact, some fMRI studies have been published in peer-reviewed journals based on five (5) respondents.
This raises a very important question: Are such small samples reliable? Continue Reading →
For companies starting to look seriously into Consumer Neuroscience, it is tempting to begin with a pilot study that includes as many neuroscience and bio-physiological measures as possible. While the “more is merrier” approach might seem like the best option for investigating and assessing the relative strengths and applications of each method and measure, it should be avoided since doing so is not only unnecessary but misleading.
Instead, we recommend a more deliberative approach in order to avoid the pitfalls and reap the benefits of neuromarketing research.
In the fall of 2010, G&R was part of a group of seven leading research firms who were invited to take part in the NeuroStandards Collaboration study undertaken by the Advertising Research Foundation (ARF) to increase knowledge about and transparency in the fast developing field of biometric and neuro-physiological research. The study was sponsored by American Express, Campbell’s, Chase, Colgate-Palmolive, Clorox, ESPN, GM, Hershey’s, MillerCoors, MTV Networks, NBC Universal, and Turner. Each research company was given the same set of eight commercials to analyze using their own proprietary physiological methods which covered a range of approaches, including EEG (electrical impulses in the brain), SST (a variation on EEG), fMRI (blood flow within the brain), Facial Coding (visual analysis of facial expressions), and bio-metrics (heart and breathing rates, and skin conductance). G&R conducted research through its Continuous Emotional Response Analysis (CERA) system, which uses Facial Electromyography (fEMG) to assess emotional response to advertising and communications by measuring electrical impulses across facial muscle groups. Continue Reading →