Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36376735›Full record

ReviewBrain informatics2022

A systematic review of the prediction of consumer preference using EEG measures and machine-learning in neuromarketing research.

Adam Byrne, Emma Bonfiglio, Colin Rigby, Nicky Edelstyn

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Brain informatics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
4.7field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 41 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. 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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Adam ByrneKeele Business School, Denise Coates Foundation Building, Keele University, Staffordshire, ST5 5AA, UK. a.byrne2@keele.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0761-3929
Emma BonfiglioFaculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, Keele University, Staffordshire, UK.
Colin RigbyKeele Business School, Denise Coates Foundation Building, Keele University, Staffordshire, ST5 5AA, UK.
Nicky EdelstynSchool of Psychology, Keele University, Staffordshire, UK.
Keele University · GB

Funding

Knowledge Transfer Partnership KTP Prog. No.: KTP 12421; KB ref. no.: R3200 C659
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe present paper discusses the findings of a systematic review of EEG measures in neuromarketing, identifying which EEG measures are the most robust predictor of customer preference in neuromarketing. The review investigated which TF effect (e.g., theta-band power), and ERP component (e.g., N400) was most consistently reflective of self-reported preference. Machine-learning prediction also investigated, along with the use of EEG when combined with physiological measures such as eye-tracking.

methodsSearch terms 'neuromarketing' and 'consumer neuroscience' identified papers that used EEG measures. Publications were excluded if they were primarily written in a language other than English or were not published as journal articles (e.g., book chapters). 174 papers were included in the present review.

resultsFrontal alpha asymmetry (FAA) was the most reliable TF signal of preference and was able to differentiate positive from negative consumer responses. Similarly, the late positive potential (LPP) was the most reliable ERP component, reflecting conscious emotional evaluation of products and advertising. However, there was limited consistency across papers, with each measure showing mixed results when related to preference and purchase behaviour. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: FAA and the LPP were the most consistent markers of emotional responses to marketing stimuli, consumer preference and purchase intention. Predictive accuracy of FAA and the LPP was greatly improved through the use of machine-learning prediction, especially when combined with eye-tracking or facial expression analyses.

Indexed as

EEGERPMachine learningNeuromarketingSystematic reviewTime–frequency

Identifiers

PMID36376735
PMCPMC9663791
OpenAlexW4308985900

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.