Skip to main content

Conflating Neuromarketing, SEO and UX

Sometimes, ideas from Graphic Art of the 1950's resurface as modern science, without considering the time difference between then and now.  The idea is to get the brand into the mind of the consumer.  The more they recognize it, the likelier they are to pick it up off the grocery shelves.

Fast Company has some ideas about the field of Neuromarketing.

And why professionals need to jump on it.

It starts by discussing how SEO is about "Search Engine Optimization", but it should be about "Social Engagement Optimization".  Which becomes problematic when you read more of the argument as it devolves from "quality content" to the conclusion about simplifying everything and appealing to emotion.  Rather than something frivolous, like reason.

 There is some "fuzzy science" about definitions:
"neuromarketing is a science that’s based on the fact that 95% of all thoughts, emotions, and learning occur before we are ever aware of it"

This is true.  In UX, we call this Pre-Attentive Processing, what the eye and brain absorb before our conscious mind catches up.  It gets measured in milliseconds of time, not brain capacity (how did they come up with that, anyway?).

"That means most of us are actually only talking to 5% of our potential customers’ brains!  Fortunately, scientists are able to study just what kind of marketing hits that other 95% of our brains in the right way,"
Since customers make their decisions based on such low bandwidth, we need to DUMB EVERYTHING DOWN.

Advice continues as follows: (paraphrasing slightly)
Make it about them.
Short & sweet.
Play to their emotions.

and here are some quotes:
"Seeing is Better than Reading"
"Stay Simple"

Use pretty pictures, preferably of humans, for that empathy thing, y'know?  And don't use too many words.

To make it worse, it seems the post was inspired by a piece in the New York Times.

"There has also been much discussion lately about the rewiring that is happening to our brains because of our constant interaction with computers and smartphones. This interaction is further reducing our attention spans, which is pushing overworked and overcommitted American consumers to make purchasing and other decisions more quickly. The upshot is that people want information but they want it baby style — pureed to its most basic and served simply."

So in other words, you are "helping" those poor overcommitted consumers/suckers to click the "Buy" button on your product before they have a chance to think about it.

Except that isn't how people purchase things on the internet.  Trust, as displayed in design, is still a huge concept.  Offering advice like "baby style" to the entire marketing, online and information community is just plain irresponsible and underestimates the entire potential audience.  And encourages  even shorter attention spans, because there is just no deeper analysis or content to find.



Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Where is the Real Difference among Film/TV/Online and Theater?

Other than the distribution channels, what are the REAL distinctions between Film, TV and on line media?  Other than economics, prestige and tradition, there is no difference. For instance, if you are a writer with a brilliant script, you want to maximize the exposure and influence of your work.  If you are approached by producers of various media, you’d hope to get to the “top of the food chain”. Naturally, you’d choose a Film contract-assuming that the budget would be high, as it always is-each film requiring a unique production crew, sets, even a unique accountant.  Plus, you’d hope, that each scene would have intense focus and blood, sweat and tears poured into each shot for ultimately 90 minutes of story. TV has scales of efficiencies, presumably a production company already in place, cranking out “Made for TV Movies”, or better yet-they’d allow your idea to grow and breathe, beyond the scope of 90 minutes. Maybe a miniseries? Online media (i.e. Youtube, or ANY other vid

Casual Spelling

So I have a friend who is constantly posting very cynical things to Facebook.  I've decided that of all the crazies, his stuff is usually the most outlandish, so I haven't deleted him from my feed. When I saw this picture he posted, (weeks after the incident!) my eyes teared up slightly.   His comment: "Incredible that a school sign uses spellings like 'luv' and 'u'--kids will never know the true spellings of these words if this is the constant." He is of the Baby Boomer generation and I am closer to the Gen Y/Millennials.  What he doesn't get is the subtlety, and the reason the picture touched me.  I am trained in Linguistics, and he greatly underestimates the younger generations.  The very words he is complaining about are examples of casual spelling, which suggest a more personal connection to the children than the words spelled out fully. Children have been exposed to plenty examples of both kinds and it is a matter

UX Review: Kobobooks.com Fails on Recommendations

As a User Experience Strategist, I am amazed at how some websites don't invest in their greatest assets.  If you are an ebook marketer, why not expose your repeat customers to your wide selection of titles?  Kobo, please give me a reason to give you my money!! Full Customer Profile & Experience: I love being surrounded by the books I have purchased.  Not that I have read all of those I own, not by any stretch.  And frankly I create a whole new pile of books TO READ everytime I tidy up and rearrange them.  That is what it means to have a physical artifact. When I am on my computer, I vary my time between work, surfing reading and allow my mind to go wherever it wants (as long as I'm not under deadline).   If I purchase an ebook, I can only read it on my laptop or my iPhone.  I refuse to purchase yet another device, when I should just read one of these paper artifacts. While doing research, there was a book that was only available on kobobooks.com, so (being game), I