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.
- © Copyright 2015 The ARF. All rights reserved.
ARF MEMBERS
If you are a member of the Advertising Research Foundation, you can access the content by logging in here
Log In
Pay Per Article - You may access this article (from the computer you are currently using) for 30 days for US$20.00
Regain Access - You can regain access to a recent Pay per Article purchase if your access period has not yet expired.
Log in using your username and password
Vol 55 Issue 2
