A
study involving 67 people showed no preference for either Coca-ColaŽ
(CokeŽ) or PepsiŽ when the drinks were administered anonymously,
according to results published in the Oct. 14 issue of the journal
Neuron. However, when told what they were drinking, roughly
three-fourths preferred Coke. All 67 also submitted to brain scans.
“There’s a huge effect of the Coke label on brain activity related
to the control of actions, the drudging up of memories, and things that
involve self-image,” said Dr. Read Montague, director of the Brown
Human Neuroimaging Lab at Baylor College of Medicine.
The BCM study, funded by the National Institute of Drug Abuse, is
the first to analyze how cultural messages penetrate parts of the brain
and influence personal preferences, and its results, Montague says,
belie claims made during the “Pepsi Challenge” advertising campaign of
the 1980s, in which taste testers purportedly chose Pepsi over Coke
when they were not told what they were drinking.
“We live in a sea of cultural messages. Everybody has heard of Coke
and Pepsi, they have messages, and, in the case of Coke, those messages
have insinuated themselves in our nervous systems,” said Montague, the
principal investigator of the study. “There is a response in the brain
which leads to a behavioral effect – in this case, personal preference
– regarding these beverages.”
Coke and Pepsi were used not only because of their cultural
familiarity but also because they consist primarily of sugar and water.
Both ingredients are considered “primary reinforcers” that resonate in
an area of the brain called the ventral putamen, which is involved in
reward-related learning, or positive values attributed to activities
like eating and drinking.
Functional magnetic resonance imaging allowed Montague to predict
fairly accurately which people preferred Coke or Pepsi before they even
took a sip.
“We were stunned by how easy this was,” Montague said. “I could tell
what they were going to do by looking at their brain scans.”
“Neuromarketing,” an area of neuroscience that maps brain activity
as it relates to social sciences like economics and ethics, has drawn
criticism from some consumer rights activists who claim that
neuromarketing research poses unethical risks and could lead to
manipulative business strategies by corporations eager to market their
products more effectively.
Montague counters that these critics misunderstand the nature of
such research and that the Coke and Pepsi study actually empowers
consumers by making them aware of their susceptibility to cultural
messages and images.
“We are not trying to figure out how to market something better,”
Montague said. “We want to be able to better understand how brains work
so that we can hopefully cure more neurological disorders.”
http://www.bcm.edu |