Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30443210›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in human neuroscience2018

The Application of Mobile fNIRS in Marketing Research-Detecting the "

Caspar Krampe, Nadine Ruth Gier, Peter Kenning

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in human neuroscience, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
4.1field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed, 63 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Decision neuroscience and neuroeconomics: Recent progress and ongoing challenges.Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Cognitive science · 2022
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Anticancer activity prediction ofJournal of advanced pharmaceutical technology & research
    Article
  18. Neural correlates of chocolate brand preference: A functional MRI study.Journal of neuroimaging : official journal of the American Society of Neuroimaging
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Caspar KrampeFaculty of Business Administration and Economics, Heinrich-Heine-Universität, Düsseldorf, Germany.
Nadine Ruth GierFaculty of Business Administration and Economics, Heinrich-Heine-Universität, Düsseldorf, Germany.
Peter KenningFaculty of Business Administration and Economics, Heinrich-Heine-Universität, Düsseldorf, Germany.
Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recent research in the field of "neuro-marketing" shows promise to substantially increase knowledge on marketing issues for example price-perception, advertising efficiency, branding and shopper behaviour. Recently, an innovative and mobile applicable neuroimaging method has been proposed, namely functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS). However, this method is, in the research field of marketing, still in its infancy and is, consequently, lacking substantial validity. Against this background, this research work applied a convergent validity approach to challenge the validity of (mobile) fNIRS in the field of "neuro-marketing" and consumer neuroscience. More precisely, we aim to replicate a robust and well-investigated neural effect previously detected with fMRI-namely the "

Indexed as

consumer neurosciencefirst-choice-brand effectfNIRSneuroimaging“neuro-marketing”shopper neuroscience

Identifiers

PMID30443210
PMCPMC6222120
OpenAlexW2899360587

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.