The term itself is self explanatory: Neuromarketing looks to identify brain stimulus produced by advertising. The results then become a source to shape the marketing approach that would generate a “positive” response from the consumer. Although seen by many as a powerful tool, just listening to the name of the technique immediately raises questions about individual consumer rights. Is Neuromarketing an excessive machiavellian form of manipulation? Could it be compare to brainwashing?
After all, the use of medical technology in order to look this deep into consumer minds may be the seller’s ideal dream, but the consumers’ worst nightmare. Let’s take a moment to look at both sides. It is true that all marketing and advertising techniques involve certain measure of persuasion. In one way or another, the objective is always to convince the consumer to buy. However, if the use of this rocket science method is based on subconscious response as some of its detractors claim, buyers could be facing an unethical way of persuasion or moreover a degree of brainwashing.
In her article How Brainwashing Works, Julia Layton defines brainwashing as a “severe form of social influence that causes changes in someone's way of thinking without that person's consent and often against his will.” Isn’t this what neuromarketers do? Obviously, the answer will depend on the scientific and biological roots of Neuromarketing. As showed in the R. Kayne article called What is Neuromarketing?, the technique is relatively new and there are divergent versions on how it really works and even on if it works at all.
One aspect to examine is the relation between values and positive or negative stimulus. From an introspective view, many of us have been in situations where something makes us happy even though moral constraints prevent us to show or behave in accordance to that feeling. In these cases Neuromarketing could change that, making us act or buy things against our values, which would have relevant societal repercussions. Of course this is going to the extreme, but it is a possible outcome of a further development of this trend that is worth to keep in consideration.
Ultimately, we don’t want to become programmed robots going to the store’s shelves to buy what greedy companies want us to buy to increase their profits, against both, our conscious awareness of preference and our moral inclinations. We want to spend our money in those things we prefer, not in those things sellers trick us to believe we want!
I believe neuromarketing is a useful tool for a company to detect and then predict any specific preference of a market. With this, the company could increase the chance the product will be sold. One way to do this is by modifying the product’s appearance (the packaging for example) to make it look like it is a specific need. Here the consumer would face the dilemma of whether the product is a necessity or a desire (that is, a need or a want). It is sometimes not so difficult to differentiate between both, but like I said, sometimes.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I don’t really think neuromarketing will make us fight against our own values when we are buying a product, but it may do so when the company is selling an idea, like a donation for a non-profit organization. What would happen if the idea is being promoted by a pro-abortion institution? How about by a pro-life institution? Look at this experiment about the idea of what a value could be for people.
Will the use of neuroscience in marketing have the power to change these values?
I believe whenever there is some change people tend to get skeptical about it. It’s the toughest job of company or individual to convince other individual when other person has a predetermined perception about something. When men started using computers for their convenience people started to think machines have come to take away their jobs. But on the contrary machines created jobs and helped mankind to reach new heights. Neuro marketing has just evolved and we can see companies are making products using this technology so that they can satisfy consumer needs. This new technology can make consumers more satisfied and happy because they are getting things they want. I do feel it might be used by bigger corporations who can afford such technology and research. This will definitely hurt small players in industry. But then in capitalistic economy “money makes Money “and there is always survival of fittest. Man also survived and evolved similarly people will learn and come up with new concepts and innovations which can help them as well as help consumers.
ReplyDelete