Neuromarketing – the use of physiological measurements (such as brain activity) to understand consumer behavior – is arousing both fascination and concern. But what exactly are consumers’ ethical concerns about neuromarketing, and how can companies effectively address these concerns?
Neuromarketing, an emerging field that measures brain activity and behavior for marketing purposes, raises important ethical questions. This article, based on the VLAIO TETRA Neuromarketing project Thomas Moreexamines the ethical aspects of neuromarketing from the perspective of consumer concerns.
Also contributing to this article: Dieter Struyf, Nele De Witte in Audrey Verrall.
We identify two main categories of concerns:
- Unrealistic expectations about the potential of neuromarketing
- Legitimate concerns about privacy and abuse
In this article, we share how companies can address these concerns through transparency, compliance with ethical codes such as the NMSBA Code of Ethics, and following regulations such as the GDPR and the emerging EU AI legislation. By focusing on ethical considerations, companies can use neuromarketing responsibly and maintain consumer trust.
These questions are critical as the line between effective marketing and potential manipulation becomes increasingly blurred. Neuromarketing promises unprecedented insights into consumer behavior, but at the same time raises questions. Consider privacy, autonomy and the ethical limits of persuasive techniques. We explore consumer concerns, from unrealistic fears to legitimate objections, and provide practical guidance for companies looking to adopt neuromarketing without crossing ethical boundaries.
By exploring the balance between innovation and ethics, we aim to empower both businesses and consumers. Because in a world where technology and marketing are becoming increasingly intertwined, understanding and addressing ethical challenges is not only desirable, but essential for sustainable business success.
Consumer concerns and possible solutions
Out the literature and Thomas More’s own analysis of the pre- and post-attitudes of Proof of Concepts participants show that most consumers do not have a negative opinion about neuromarketing. However, it doesn’t mean there isn’t one to assure exist about neuromarketing. The largest to assure of consumers about neuromarketing can be divided into two categories:
1. Unrealistic expectations about the potential of neuromarketing
First, concerns arise from unrealistic expectations, such as fear of loss of autonomy and freedom of choice in predictable decisions and finding and locating a ‘buy button’ in the brain. This means that there are consumers who are concerned about the possibility of brands and companies finding the knowledge to pressure people into buying their products or services.
To address these concerns, it is important that consumers become aware that neuromarketing is not a panacea. It is one of many marketing research methods used to learn more about consumer responses. However, it is not possible to fully predict consumer choices. It is therefore necessary to increase knowledge and transparency about neuromarketing and to clarify its possibilities for consumers.
2. Legitimate Privacy and Abuse Concerns
The second group of concerns, which are not necessarily unrealistic, include concerns about privacy and potential abuse, the use of vulnerable groups and deceptive practices for commercial gain. A lack of regulatory guidelines also remains a concern, potentially further adding to other concerns.
There is a need for special attention to comply with rules and ethical codes such as the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and the ethical code of the Neuromarketing Science and Business Association (NMSBA). The use of neuromarketing for social purposes is also presented in the literature as a way to increase consumer confidence and reduce their concerns. We discuss NMSBA Code of Ethics further below.
The NMSBA Code of Ethics
The Neuromarketing Business and Science Association (NMSBA), as the global community of neuromarketing, has a code of ethics that includes several ethical responsibilities. The responsibilities involved in this code of ethics mentioned, from a consumer perspective, mainly relate to transparency, consent, privacy and prioritizing and protecting participants and consumers. These central themes and the associated actions are shown in the table below.
| Central theme | Associated actions |
|---|---|
| Transparency | Establish protocols for incidental brain imaging findings |
| To ensure transparency about the research process | |
| Share documents and findings between researcher and client | |
| To be open about the skills of researchers | |
| Make a clear distinction between data interpretation and important findings in publications | |
| Consent | Clearly explain tools and protocols |
| To fully inform participants about objectives and techniques | |
| Obtain parental consent for participants under 18 years of age | |
| Offer participants the opportunity to withdraw during the study | |
| Privacy | Inform participants about data collection |
| Provide an accessible privacy policy | |
| Obtain consent before identity can possibly be revealed | |
| Limit personal information to research purposes | |
| Minimize retention periods | |
| Protect research data | |
| Respond to requests to remove or modify insights | |
| Prioritize and protect participants and consumers |
Avoid deception |
| Prioritize the well-being of participants, both mentally and physically | |
| Do not offer sales incentives during the investigation | |
| To ensure that participants participate voluntarily |
By EU AI-wetgeving
With technological developments and companies’ growing interest in scalable neuromarketing options, new methods such as AI techniques are emerging. An example of this is predictive eye tracking. Algorithms predict eye movements and gaze locations of consumers while, for example, watching an advertising video.
However, this comes with it a new set of ethical issues on our path. The way databases of real people are collected for the algorithms, the low transparency about the AI processes and the biases that would arise from insufficient data are some of the concerns that may be added by the existence of AI in the process.
In the case of the use of AI in neuromarketing methods within the EU, it is necessary to follow the European AI legislation. The EU AI legislation has been drawn up based on the risks that different applications of AI can entail. Therefore, there are some use cases that are not allowed and other use cases that pose a high risk. For the latter, some regulations must be followed.
However, the rules may differ depending on the purpose and method of use of AI and the role of the company as a provider, implementer, importer or product manufacturer. It is therefore recommended to fully check and consult the original EU AI ACT document when using AI in neuromarketing or to this available tool to find the relevant parts of the EU AI Act for a specific use.
Practical steps in ethical neuromarketing
So take consumer concerns seriously. And consider the risks of using neuromarketing, prioritizing transparency, consent, privacy and consumer protection. You do this by following ethical codes such as the NMSBA code of ethics and the EU AI Act when using AI in neuromarketing.
In addition, it is important to assure consumers of the commitment to ethical standards when using neuromarketing. It would also be useful to increase awareness of both participants and consumers about their rights, the procedure of the study, and the capabilities and limitations of neuromarketing. And to provide opportunities so that they can ask questions about this if necessary.
These are practical steps to implement ethical neuromarketing. This not only helps protect the rights and well-being of consumers and alleviate their concerns. It can also help strengthen the company’s reputation and increase consumer confidence.
Source: www.frankwatching.com
