Abstract
Given the explosion of interest in the fields of multisensory packaging design and consumer neuroscience/neuromarketing in recent years, it is natural to wonder what relevance the latter approaches have as far as the optimization of the former is concerned. In this review, we chart the use of neuroimaging techniques such as electroencephalography and functional magnetic resonance imaging by those wishing to understand the neural response of consumers to various examples of multisensory product packaging. The hope is that such insights might one day help businesses to better predict the performance of product packaging, given specific strategic objectives. To date, much of the research has focused simply on determining the network of brain areas that are involved in processing visual images of product packaging. Intriguingly, though, the latest findings now suggest that composite brain measures seen in response to product communication may, under certain conditions at least, be used to predict a product’s sales success in the marketplace. We highlight the key challenges associated with using neuroimaging techniques for packaging research and stress the limitations (such as the challenges associated with assessing the influence of tactile and olfactory attributes of the packaging, as well as collecting repeated measures when consumers interact with the product in its packaging). We end by reviewing the latest insights that have emerged from the use of neuroscience-inspired (consumer neuroscience) techniques (including so-called implicit tests, such as the Implicit Association Test, and eye-tracking), that have managed to overcome some of the limitations associated with neuroimaging.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
As captured in Google Scholar searches, on February 28, 2018, of article titles, the literature on the topic is not extensive: Packaging + Neuroscience = 2 articles; Packaging + Neuromarketing = 3 articles; Brand + Neuromarketing = 14 articles; Brand + Neuroscience = 9 articles; Packaging + Psychology = 65 articles.
- 2.
Note, however, that a recent review by Lee, Chamberlain, and Brandes (2018) suggests that the available literature in neuromarketing and consumer neuroscience (both terms which they use interchangeably) appears to be somewhat fragmented. Furthermore, clear guidelines as to what constitutes good practice in the field seem to be lacking.
- 3.
It should, however, always be remembered that it is more the brand than specifically the packaging that is doing the work in this case. That said, signature packaging is a valuable brand asset for many companies.
- 4.
Event-related potentials (ERPs) are electrical potentials generated by the brain related to specific internal or external events. The electroencephalography (EEG) records the electrical activity of the brain. EEG data provide indications on different brain rhythms depending on the activation state of the neurons. EEG has very high temporal resolution (milliseconds) but a low spatial resolution. Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) provides indirect measures of brain activity, based on the blood-oxygen-level dependent (BOLD) contrast. The method is based on the magnetic properties of oxygenated/deoxygenated blood. fMRI can produce high spatial resolutions (1–3 mm) but has a poor temporal resolution (seconds). Other neuroimaging techniques such as, for example, positron emission tomography (PET), that rely on the injection of a radioactive tracer into the participant’s bloodstream are understandably less popular in commercial neuromarketing research than they have been in medical research.
- 5.
However, the fact that his research appears in an edited book, rather than a high-impact peer-reviewed journal article, probably says something about the perceived usefulness of his approach at the time in was published.
- 6.
Beta wave is a neural oscillation in the brain with a frequency range of 13–30 Hz. Beta wave is mostly related to alertness and concentration.
- 7.
In total, 30 exemplars of product packaging (e.g., pizza boxes) were shown 4 times in a random order for 10 seconds each. The participants had to make a speeded forced choice response to each image of product packaging.
- 8.
Note that in a highly cited early consumer neuroscience study, Knutson, Rick, Wimmer, Prelec, and Loewenstein (2007) were able to demonstrate that the purchase decision (for a product shown on the screen while participants lay in the brain scanner) was associated with activity in the nucleus accumbens (NAcc). Meanwhile, high prices resulted in increased activation in the insula and reduced activity in medial orbitofrontal cortex (mOFC).
- 9.
Meanwhile, Hubert, Hubert, Sommer, and Kenning (2009) conducted a study (N = 11) in order to assess the attractiveness of different packages with and without framing information, in this particular case, retail brands. Their analyses revealed variations across participants in terms of the latter’s susceptibility to retail (framing) brand information, as reflected in the patterns of cortical activation (in particular in the vmPFC, which was higher for more susceptible participants).
- 10.
Note that a surprisingly large number of consumers are poisoned in this way every year (i.e., by accidentally ingesting such home and personal care [HPC] products that are packaged to remind people of food products).
- 11.
The P300 is an evoked potential measure. P means that the wave has a positive amplitude, and 300 means that it appears 300 ms after the onset of the relevant stimulation.
- 12.
That said, it should be remembered that the participants only ranked their liking of the visual communications once at the end of the fMRI study, whereas the BOLD response to each visual communication was assessed six times.
- 13.
According to an analysis conducted by Fisher, Chin, and Klitzman (2010), galvanic skin response (GSR) is a particularly popular offering amongst neuromarketing companies.
- 14.
It is unclear quite what the “experiments” in the second sentence is really supposed to refer to here, given that both behavioural scientists and cognitive neuroscientists would, we imagine, insist that they conducted experiments. One could, we think, also legitimately claim that certain neuroimaging techniques, specifically ERPs, should actually be considered as traditional given that marketing and advertising researchers have been using them for almost half a century (e.g., Eckstrand & Gilliland, 1948; Krugman, 1971; Weinstein, 1981; Weinstein, Drozdenko, & Weinstein, 1984).
- 15.
And the marketers are by no means exceptional in this regard. Psychologist Gerd Gigerenzer had the following to say on the topic: “I’ve worked with large companies and asked decision makers how often they base an important professional decision on that gut feeling. In the companies I’ve worked with, which are large international companies, about 50% of all decisions are at the end a gut decision” (quoted in Fox, 2014).
References
Anonymous. (2014). Digital roadblock: Marketers struggle to reinvent themselves. Retrieved from https://www.adobe.com/content/dam/Adobe/en/solutions/digital-marketing/pdfs/adobe-digital-roadblock-survey.pdf
Ariely, D., & Berns, G. S. (2010). Neuromarketing: The hope and hype of neuroimaging in business. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 11, 284–292.
Aspinall, P., Mavros, P., Coyne, R., & Roe, J. (2015). The urban brain: Analysing outdoor physical activity with mobile EEG. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 49(4), 272–276.
Barrera-Valencia, M. (2015). Editorial. Neurotechnologies: The need for an ethical commitment in their implementation. Revista ces Psicología, 8(2 Julio-Diciembre), i–iii.
Basso, F., Robert-Demontrond, P., Hayek, M., Anton, J., Nazaian, B., Roth, M., et al. (2014). Why people drink shampoo? Food imitating products are fooling brains and endangering consumers for marketing purposes. PLoS ONE, 9(9), e100368.
Bechara, A. (2005). Decision making, impulse control and loss of willpower to resist drugs: A neurocognitive perspective. Nature Neuroscience, 8, 1458.
Becker, L., Van Rompay, T. J. L., Schifferstein, H. N. J., & Galetzka, M. (2011). Tough package, strong taste: The influence of packaging design on taste impressions and product evaluations. Food Quality and Preference, 22, 17–23.
Blakeman, S. (2017, March 20). Why ‘gut feel’ is better than ‘Big Data’. Pulse. Retrieved from https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/why-gut-feel-better-than-big-data-steve-blakeman
Bleichner, M. G., & Debener, S. (2017). Concealed, unobtrusive ear-centered EEG acquisition: cEEGrids for transparent EEG. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 11, 163.
Button, K. S., Ioannidis, J. P., Mokrysz, C., Nosek, B. A., Flint, J., Robinson, E. S., & Munafò, M. R. (2013). Power failure: Why small sample size undermines the reliability of neuroscience. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 14, 365–376.
Cacioppo, J. T., Tassinary, L. G., & Berntson, G. G. (2007). Handbook of psychophysiology (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Calvert, G. A., & Brammer, M. J. (2012). Predicting consumer behavior: Using novel mindreading approaches. IEEE Pulse, 3, 38–41.
Calvert, G., Fulcher, E., Fulcher, G., Foster, P., & Rose, H. (2014). Using implicit methods to develop an objective measure of media brand engagement. International Journal of Market Research, 56(1), 15–32.
Catterall, M., & Maclaran, P. (2006). Focus groups in marketing research. In R. W. Belk (Ed.), Handbook of qualitative research methods in marketing (pp. 255–267). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
Center for Open Science. (2015). Open Science Framework: Registered reports. Retrieved from https://osf.io/8mpji/wiki/home/
Chambers, C. (2014). Psychology’s ‘registration revolution’. The Guardian. Retrieved from http://www.theguardian.com/science/head-quarters/2014/may/20/psychology-registration-revolution
Chan, H. Y., Boksem, M., & Smidts, A. (2018). Neural profiling of brands: Mapping brand image in consumers’ brains with visual templates. Journal of Marketing Research, 55, 600–615
Clement, J. (2007). Visual influence on in-store buying decisions: An eye-track experiment on the visual influence of packaging design. Journal of Marketing Management, 23, 917–928.
Cuthbert, B. N., Schupp, H. T., Bradley, M. M., Birbaumer, N., & Lang, P. J. (2000). Brain potentials in affective picture processing: Covariation with autonomic arousal and affective report. Biological Psychology, 52(2), 95–111.
Davis, T. (1987). Taste tests: Are the blind leading the blind? Beverage World, 3(April), 42–44, 50, 85.
Debener, S., Emkes, R., De Vos, M., & Bleichner, M. (2015). Unobtrusive ambulatory EEG using a smartphone and flexible printed electrodes around the ear. Scientific Reports, 5, 16743.
Delgado, M. R. (2007). Reward-related responses in the human striatum. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1104(1), 70–88.
Durgee, J. F., & O’Connor, G. C. (1996). Perceiving what package designs express: A multisensory exploratory study using creative writing measurement techniques. In A. Gelinas (Ed.), Creative applications: Sensory techniques used in conducting packaging research (pp. 48–61). West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM Publications.
Eckstrand, G., & Gilliland, A. R. (1948). The psychogalvanometric method for measuring the effectiveness of advertising. Journal of Applied Psychology, 32, 415–425.
Editorial. (2004). Neuromarketing: Beyond branding. Lancet Neurology, 3, 71.
Falk, E. B., Berkman, E. T., Mann, T., Harrison, B., & Lieberman, M. D. (2010). Predicting persuasion-induced behavior change from the brain. Journal of Neuroscience, 30, 8421–8424.
Fisher, C. E., Chin, L., & Klitzman, R. (2010). Defining neuromarketing: Practices and professional challenges. Harvard Review of Psychiatry, 18, 230–237.
Fox, J. (2014, June 20). Instinct can beat analytical thinking. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2014/06/instinct-can-beat-analytical-thinking
Frary, M. (2016, October 27). The science behind shopping. Raconteur. Retrieved from https://www.raconteur.net/business/the-science-behind-shopping
Fugate, D. L. (2007). Neuromarketing: A layman’s look at neuroscience and its potential application to marketing practice. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 24, 385–394.
Gallace, A., Ngo, M. K., Sulaitis, J., & Spence, C. (2012). Multisensory presence in virtual reality: Possibilities & limitations. In G. Ghinea, F. Andres, & S. Gulliver (Eds.), Multiple sensorial media advances and applications: New developments in MulSeMedia (pp. 1–40). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
Gates, P. W., Copeland, J., Stevenson, R. J., & Dillon, P. (2007). The influence of product packaging on young people’s palatability ratings for RTDs and other alcoholic beverages. Alcohol and Alcoholism, 42, 138–142.
Gonzales, J. E., & Cunningham, C. A. (2015, August). The promise of pre-registration in psychological research: Encouraging a priori research and decreasing publication bias. Psychological Science Agenda. Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/science/about/psa/2015/08/pre-registration.aspx
Guixeres, J., Bigné, E., Azofra, J. M. A., Raya, M. A., Granero, A. C., Hurtado, F. F., & Ornedo, V. N. (2017). Consumer neuroscience-based metrics predict recall, liking and viewing rates in online advertising. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 1808.
Hare, T. A., Camerer, C. F., & Rangel, A. (2009). Self-control in decision-making involves modulation of the vmPFC valuation system. Science, 324(5927), 646–648.
Henrich, J., Heine, S. J., & Norenzayan, A. (2010). The weirdest people in the world? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 33, 61–135.
Hubert, M., Hubert, M., Linzmajer, M., Riedl, R., & Kenning, P. (2018). Trust me if you can–neurophysiological insights on the influence of consumer impulsiveness on trustworthiness evaluations in online settings. European Journal of Marketing, 52, 118–146.
Hubert, M., Hubert, M., Sommer, J., & Kenning, P. H. (2009). Consumer neuroscience the effect of retail brands on the perception of product packaging. Marketing Review St. Gallen, 26(4), 28–33.
Husić-Mehmedović, M., Omeragić, I., Batagelj, Z., & Kolar, T. (2017). Seeing is not necessarily liking: Advancing research on package design with eye-tracking. Journal of Business Research, 80, 145–154.
Iidaka, T., Terashima, S., Yamashita, K., Okada, T., Sadato, N., & Yonekura, Y. (2003). Dissociable neural responses in the hippocampus to the retrieval of facial identity and emotion: An event-related fMRI study. Hippocampus, 13(4), 429–436.
Javor, A., Koller, M., Lee, N., Chamberlain, L., & Ransmayr, G. (2013). Neuromarketing and consumer neuroscience: Contributions to neurology. BMC Neurology, 13, 13. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2377-13-13
Jones, D. (2010). A WEIRD view of human nature skews psychologists’ studies. Science, 328, 1627.
Juravle, G., Velasco, C., Salgado-Montejo, A., & Spence, C. (2015). The hand grasps the centre, while the eyes saccade to the top of novel objects. Frontiers in Psychology: Perception Science, 6, 633. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00633
Khushaba, R. N., Wise, C., Kodagoda, S., Louviere, J., Kahn, B. E., & Townsend, C. (2013). Consumer neuroscience: Assessing the brain response to marketing stimuli using electroencephalogram (EEG) and eye tracking. Expert Systems with Applications, 40(9), 3803–3812.
Knoeferle, K., Knoeferle, P., Velasco, C., & Spence, C. (2016). Multisensory brand search: How the meaning of sounds guides consumers’ visual attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 22, 196–210.
Knutson, B., Rick, S., Wimmer, G. E., Prelec, D., & Loewenstein, G. (2007). Neural predictors of purchases. Neuron, 53, 147–156.
Krampe, C., Strelow, E., Haas, A., & Kenning, P. (2018). The application of mobile fNIRS to “shopper neuroscience”—First insights from a merchandising communication study. European Journal of Marketing, 52, 244–259. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJM-12-2016-0727
Kroeber-Riel, W. (1979). Activation research: Psychobiological approaches in consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research, 5, 240–250.
Krugman, H. E. (1971). Brain wave measures of media involvement. Journal of Advertising Research, 11(1), 3–9.
Kühn, S., & Gallinat, J. (2013). Does taste matter? How anticipation of cola brands influences gustatory processing in the brain. PLoS ONE, 8(4), e61569.
Kühn, S., Strelow, E., & Gallinat, J. (2016). Multiple “buy buttons” in the brain: Forecasting chocolate sales at point-of-sale based on functional brain activation using fMRI. NeuroImage, 136, 122–128.
Lee, N., Chamberlain, L., & Brandes, L. (2018). Welcome to the jungle! The neuromarketing literature through the eyes of a newcomer. European Journal of Marketing, 52, 4–38.
Linder, N. S., Uhl, G., Fliessbach, K., Trautner, P., Elger, C. E., et al. (2010). Organic labeling influences food valuation and choice. NeuroImage, 53, 215–220.
Lindstrom, M. (2008). Buy-ology: How everything we believe about why we buy is wrong. London, UK: Random House Business Books.
Louw, A., & Kimber, M. (2011). The power of packaging. Retrieved February 6, 2011, from http://www.tnsglobal.com/_assets/files/The_power_of_packaging.pdf
Ludden, G. D. S., & Schifferstein, H. N. J. (2007). Effects of visual-auditory incongruity on product expression and surprise. International Journal of Design, 1, 29–39.
Ludden, G. D. S., Schifferstein, H. N. J., & Hekkert, P. (2009). Visual-tactual incongruities in products as sources of surprise. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 27(1), 61–87.
Lunt, S. G. (1981). Using focus groups in packaging research. In W. Stern (Ed.), Handbook of package design research (pp. 112–124). New York, NY: Wiley Interscience.
Martin, D. (1990). The impact of branding and marketing on perception of sensory qualities. Food Science & Technology Today: Proceedings, 4(1), 44–49.
Martin, L. E. (2014). Effects of plain packaging on decision-making and reward for nicotine cigarettes. Neuroscience and Neuroeconomics, 3, 63–73.
McClure, S. M., Li, J., Tomlin, D., Cypert, K. S., Montague, L. M., & Montague, P. R. (2004). Neural correlates of behavioral preference for culturally familiar drinks. Neuron, 44, 379–387.
Moskowitz, H. R. (1981). Psychophysical approaches to package design and evaluation. In W. Stern (Ed.), Handbook of package design research (pp. 505–534). New York, NY: Wiley Interscience.
Nitschke, J. B., Dixon, G. E., Sarinopoulos, I., Short, S. J., Cohen, J. D., Smith, E. E., … J, R. (2006). Altering expectancy dampens neural response to aversive taste in primary taste cortex. Nature Neuroscience, 9, 435–442.
Orquin, J. L., & Loose, S. M. (2013). Attention and choice: A review on eye movements in decision making. Acta Psychologica, 144, 190–206.
Oullier, O. (2012). Clear up this fuzzy thinking on brain scans. Nature, 483, 7.
Parise, C. V., & Spence, C. (2012). Assessing the associations between brand packaging and brand attributes using an indirect performance measure. Food Quality and Preference, 24, 17–23.
Pathak, A., Calvert, G., & Velasco, C. (2017). Evaluating the impact of early-and late-acquired phonemes on the luxury appeal of brand names. Journal of Brand Management, 24(6), 522–545.
Petit, O., Basso, F., Merunka, D., Spence, C., Cheok, A. D., & Oullier, O. (2016). Pleasure and the control of food intake: An embodied cognition approach to consumer self-regulation. Psychology & Marketing, 33, 608–619.
Petit, O., Merunka, D., Anton, J. L., Nazarian, B., Spence, C., Cheok, A. D., … Oullier, O. (2016). Health and pleasure in consumers’ dietary food choices: Individual differences in the brain’s value system. PLoS ONE, 11(7), e0156333.
Petit, O., Merunka, D., & Oullier, O. (2014). Neurosciences et comportement du consommateur 1. Outils et méthodes d’investigation/neuroscience and consumer behaviour: 1. Tools and methods of investigation. Revue Française du Marketing, 247(2/5), 7–25.
Piqueras-Fiszman, B., & Spence, C. (2011). Crossmodal correspondences in product packaging: Assessing color-flavor correspondences for potato chips (crisps). Appetite, 57, 753–757.
Piqueras-Fiszman, B., Velasco, C., Salgado-Montejo, A., & Spence, C. (2013). Combined eye tracking and word association analysis to evaluate the impact of changing the multisensory attributes of food packaging. Food Quality & Preference, 28, 328–338.
Plassmann, H., O’Doherty, J., Shiv, B., & Rangel, A. (2008). Marketing actions can modulate neural representations of experienced pleasantness. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, 105, 1050–1054.
Plassmann, H., Ramsøy, T. Z., & Milosavljevic, M. (2012). Branding the brain: A critical review and outlook. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 22, 18–36.
Poldrack, R. A. (2006). Can cognitive processes be inferred from neuroimaging data? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 10(2), 59–63.
Pradeep, A. K. (2010). The buying brain: Secrets of selling to the subconscious mind. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Reimann, M., Zaichkowsky, J., Neuhaus, C., Bender, T., & Weber, B. (2010). Aesthetic package design: A behavioral, neural, and psychological investigation. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 20, 431–441.
Shimojo, S., Simion, C., Shimojo, E., & Scheier, C. (2003). Gaze bias both reflects and influences preference. Nature Neuroscience, 6, 1317.
Spence, C. (2009). Measuring the impossible. In MINET Conference: Measurement, sensation and cognition (pp. 53–61). Teddington, UK: National Physical Laboratories.
Spence, C. (2010). The price of everything—The value of nothing? The World of Fine Wine, 30, 114–120.
Spence, C. (2016a). The neuroscience of flavor. In B. Piqueras-Fiszman & C. Spence (Eds.), Multisensory flavor perception: From fundamental neuroscience through to the marketplace (pp. 235–248). Oxford, UK: Elsevier.
Spence, C. (2016b). Neuroscience-inspired design: From academic neuromarketing to commercially-relevant research. Organizational Research Methods. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428116672003
Spence, C. (In press). On the ethics of neuromarketing & sensory marketing. To appear in J. Trempe-Martineau & E. Racine (Eds.), Organizational neuroethics: Reflections on the contributions of neuroscience to management theories and business practice. Springer.
Spence, C., & Gallace, A. (2011). Multisensory design: Reaching out to touch the consumer. Psychology & Marketing, 28, 267–308.
Spence, C., Okajima, K., Cheok, A. D., Petit, O., & Michel, C. (2016). Eating with our eyes: From visual hunger to digital satiation. Brain and Cognition, 110, 53–63.
Stanton, S. J., Sinnott-Armstrong, W., & Huettel, S. (2017). Neuromarketing: Ethical implications of its use and potential misuse. Journal of Business Ethics, 144, 799–811.
Stoll, M., Baecke, S., & Kenning, P. (2008). What they see is what they get? An fMRI-study on neural correlates of attractive packaging. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 7, 342–359.
Stopczynski, A., Stahlhut, C., Larsen, J. E., Petersen, M. K., & Hansen, L. K. (2014). The smartphone brain scanner: A portable real-time neuroimaging system. PLoS ONE, 9(2), e86733.
Strack, F., & Deutsch, R. (2004). Reflective and impulsive determinants of social behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 8, 220–247.
Tijssen, I., Zandstra, E. H., de Graaf, C., & Jager, G. (2017). Why a ‘light’ product package should not be light blue: Effects of package colour on perceived healthiness and attractiveness of sugar- and fat-reduced products. Food Quality and Preference, 59, 46–58.
Van der Laan, L. N., De Ridder, D. T., Viergever, M. A., & Smeets, P. A. (2011). The first taste is always with the eyes: A meta-analysis on the neural correlates of processing visual food cues. NeuroImage, 55, 296–303.
Van der Laan, L. N., De Ridder, D. T., Viergever, M. A., & Smeets, P. A. (2012). Appearance matters: Neural correlates of food choice and packaging aesthetics. PLoS ONE, 7(7), e41738.
Van Doorn, G., & Miloyan, B. (2018). The Pepsi Paradox: A review. Food Quality and Preference, 65, 194–197.
Wang, A.-L., Romer, D., Elman, I., Turetsky, B. I., Gur, R. C., & Langleben, D. D. (2015). Emotional graphic cigarette warning labels reduce the electrophysiological brain response to smoking cues. Addiction Biology, 20, 368–376.
Wedel, M., & Pieters, R. (2008). A review of eye-tracking research in marketing. In Review of marketing research (pp. 123–147). Emerald Group Publishing.
Weinstein, S. (1981). Brain wave analysis: The beginning and future of package design research. In W. Stern (Ed.), Handbook of package design research (pp. 492–504). New York, NY: Wiley Interscience.
Weinstein, S., Drozdenko, R., & Weinstein, C. (1984). Brain wave analysis in advertising research. Psychology & Marketing, 1, 83–96.
Woods, A. T., Lloyd, D. M., Kuenzel, J., Poliakoff, E., Dijksterhuis, G. B., & Thomas, A. (2011). Expected taste intensity affects response to sweet drinks in primary taste cortex. Neuroreport, 22, 365–369.
Young, E. C. (1981). Determining conspicuity and shelf impact through eye movement tracking. In W. Stern (Ed.), Handbook of package design research (pp. 535–542). New York, NY: Wiley Interscience.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Spence, C., Velasco, C., Petit, O. (2019). The Consumer Neuroscience of Packaging. In: Velasco, C., Spence, C. (eds) Multisensory Packaging. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-94977-2_12
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-94977-2_12
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-94976-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-94977-2
eBook Packages: Business and ManagementBusiness and Management (R0)