Cognitive Mechanism in Selecting New Products: A Cognitive Neuroscience Perspective

  • Kazuhiro Ueda


Potential needs and preferences of consumers are often difficult to evaluate with questionnaires. Numerous studies have indicated that in reality, people do not necessarily recognize the influences on their own preferences and misrecognize the rationale for their preferences. Neuromarketing, which is the application of neuroscientific findings to marketing has been gaining attention as a method of exploring concealed consumer needs. This chapter summarizes research that is representative of neuromarketing (McClure et al. 2004), and then introduces the author’s studies exploring the application of findings on the cognitive background of individual differences in behaviors when purchasing unknown products. Furthermore, the chapter discusses the possibilities of neuromarketing as a method of exploring hidden consumer needs and preferences.


Chinese Character Slot Machine Taste Preference Regional Bias High Cognitive Function 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



This study was supported by Collaborative Researchers in the University of Tokyo and in Asahi Breweries, Ltd./Hakuhodo, Inc. as well as Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (A) (No. 16H01725) and Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (B) (No. 25280049).


  1. Bertrand M, Mullainathan S (2004) Are Emily and Greg more employable than Lakisha and Jamal? A field experiment on labor market discrimination. Am Econ Rev 94(4):991–1013. doi: 10.1257/0002828042002561 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bornstein RF (1989) Exposure and affect: overview and meta-analysis of research, 1968–1987. Psychol Bull 106(2):265–289. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.106.2.265 Google Scholar
  3. Burns AC, Veeck A, Bush RF (2016) Marketing research, 8th edn. Pearson, BostonGoogle Scholar
  4. Daw ND, O’Doherty JP, Dayan P, Seymour B, Dolan RJ (2006) Cortical substrates for exploratory decisions in humans. Nature 441:876–879. doi: 10.1038/nature04766 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Honda H, Matsuka T, Ueda K (2016) Connecting the same regions or bridging different regions: difference in Japanese script induces different categorization (under review)Google Scholar
  6. Janiszewski C (1993) Preattentive mere exposure effects. J Consum Res 20(3):376–392. doi: 10.1086/209356 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Johansson P, Hall L, Sikström S, Olsson A (2005) Failure to detect mismatches between intention and outcome in a simple decision task. Science 310:116–119. doi: 10.1126/science.1111709 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Laham SM, Koval P, Alter AL (2012) The name-pronunciation effect: why people like Mr. Smith more than Mr. Colquhoun. J Exp Soc Psychol 48(3):752–756. doi: 10.1016/j.jesp.2011.12.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. McClure SM, Li J, Tomlin D, Cypert KS, Montague LM, Montague PR (2004) Neural correlates of behavioral preference for culturally familiar drinks. Neuron 44:379–387. doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2004.09.019 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Nelson LD, Simmons JP (2007) Moniker maladies when names sabotage success. Psychol Sci 18(12):1106–1112. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.02032.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Obermiller C (1985) Varieties of mere exposure: the effects of processing style and repetition on affective responses. J Consum Res 12(1):17–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Pelham BW, Mirenberg MC, Jones JT (2002) Why Susie sells seashells by the seashore: implicit egotism and major life decisions. J Pers Soc Psychol 82(4):469–487. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.82.4.469 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Ramsøy DR (2015) Introduction to neuromarketing & consumer neuroscience. Neurons Inc., HolbækGoogle Scholar
  14. Sutton RS, Barto AG (1998) Reinforcement learning: an introduction (Adaptive computation and machine learning). The MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  15. Ueda K, Washida Y, Arita A, Shimizu T (2010) The important role of information and cognitive features in idea generation for innovation (in Japanese). Cogn Stud 17(3):611–634.doi: 10.11225/jcss.17.611
  16. von Hippel E (2006) Democratizing innovation. The MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  17. Wilson TD, Nisbett RE (1978) The accuracy of verbal reports about the effects of stimuli on evaluations and behavior. Soc Psychol 41:118–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Yamada A, Toyama M (2010) Choice based on plausible reasons (in Japanese). Jpn J Pscyhol 81(5):492–500. doi: 10.4992/jjpsy.81.492 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Yamada A, Fukuda H, Samejima K, Kiyokawa S, Ueda K, Noba S, Wanikawa A (2014) The effect of an analytical appreciation of colas on consumer beverage choice. Food Qual Prefer 34:1–4. doi: 10.1016/j.foodqual.2013.11.008 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Zajonc RB (1968) Attitudinal effects of mere exposure. J Pers Soc Psychol 9:1–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.The University of TokyoTokyoJapan

Personalised recommendations