ArticleBrain informatics2022
Article in Brain informatics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- A hybrid neuromarketing approach exploiting EEG graph signal processing and gaze dynamic patterning.Brain informatics · 2025Article
- A systematic review on EEG-based neuromarketing: recent trends and analyzing techniques.Brain informatics · 2024Review
- Explainable artificial intelligence (xAI) in neuromarketing/consumer neuroscience: an fMRI study on brand perception.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2024Article
- Multimodal consumer choice prediction using EEG signals and eye tracking.Frontiers in computational neuroscience · 2024Article
- A Sparse Representation Classification Scheme for the Recognition of Affective and Cognitive Brain Processes in Neuromarketing.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Neuromarketing exploits neuroimaging techniques so as to reinforce the predictive power of conventional marketing tools, like questionnaires and focus groups. Electroencephalography (EEG) is the most commonly encountered neuroimaging technique due to its non-invasiveness, low-cost, and its very recent embedding in wearable devices. The transcription of brainwave patterns to consumer attitude is supported by various signal descriptors, while the quest for profitable novel ways is still an open research question. Here, we suggest the use of sample covariance matrices as alternative descriptors, that encapsulate the coordinated neural activity from distinct brain areas, and the adoption of Riemannian geometry for their handling. We first establish the suitability of Riemannian approach for neuromarketing-related problems and then suggest a relevant decoding scheme for predicting consumers' choices (e.g., willing to buy or not a specific product). Since the decision-making process involves the concurrent interaction of various cognitive processes and consequently of distinct brain rhythms, the proposed decoder takes the form of an ensemble classifier that builds upon a multi-view perspective, with each view dedicated to a specific frequency band. Adopting a standard machine learning procedure, and using a set of trials (training data) in conjunction with the associated behavior labels ("buy"/ "not buy"), we train a battery of classifiers accordingly. Each classifier is designed to operate in the space recovered from the inter-trial distances of SCMs and to cast a rhythm-depended decision that is eventually combined with the predictions of the rest ones. The demonstration and evaluation of the proposed approach are performed in 2 neuromarketing-related datasets of different nature. The first is employed to showcase the potential of the suggested descriptor, while the second to showcase the decoder's superiority against popular alternatives in the field.
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.