ArticleFrontiers in psychology2021
How Do Reference Points Influence the Representation of the N200 for Consumer Preference?
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Understanding the impact of perceived emotional valence of eco-labels for novel food products on consumer preferences, visual attention, and cognition - a multimodal study using EEG and eye tracking.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Review
- A systematic review on EEG-based neuromarketing: recent trends and analyzing techniques.Brain informatics · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Recent studies have suggested that event-related brain potential (ERP) can represent consumer preference, and there is consensus that the N200 is the best indicator of consumer preference. Measurement of reference-dependent consumer preference, in turn, requires a reference point, but it remains largely unknown how reference points modulate the preference-related N200. We designed an experiment to investigate how reference points affect the N200 based on classical paradigms. In the single-reference condition, one product was displayed in each trial; in the conjoined-reference condition, a pair of products was displayed simultaneously. Our results showed that in the single-reference condition, low-preference products elicited more negative N200 than high-preference products, replicating previous results, but the N200 could not distinguish between low- and high-preference products when viewing two options of similar subjective value in the conjoined-reference condition. These findings suggest that reference points modulate the representation of the N200 on consumer preference. When only viewing one product, participants make a value judgment based on their expectations. However, when viewing two products simultaneously, both their expectation and the alternative product can serve as reference points, and whether the N200 can represent consumer preference depends on which reference point is dominant. In future research, reference points must be controlled when the N200 is used to explore value-related decision-making.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.