How reliable are neuromarketers' measures of advertising effectiveness: Data from ongoing research holds no common truth among vendors

Duane Varan, Annie Lang, Patrick Barwise, Rene Weber, Steven Bellman

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

48 Scopus citations

Abstract

Buyers in search of new neuromarketing methods that potentially can predict advertising effectiveness face a daunting process. Vendors in this evolving industry offer a confusing range of often proprietary differences in methodology. The authors of the current article analyzed results from 'Neuro 1'—the Advertising Research Foundation's first neuro-standards trial—and revealed that there is no common truth, no single scientific reality exposed as a result of these new methods. Addressing what they believe is a need for greater transparency—even after 'Neuro 2'—which used publicly available methods, the authors demonstrated how a buyer can compare the validity of different vendors' measures.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)176-191
Number of pages16
JournalJournal of Advertising Research
Volume55
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - 2015

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'How reliable are neuromarketers' measures of advertising effectiveness: Data from ongoing research holds no common truth among vendors'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this