You are currently browsing Adam Swain’s articles.
The ultimate goal of most advertising is to drive purchase / consideration. To this end, ads typically either try to grab the consumer’s attention using mechanisms that have little to do with the actual product (e.g., beer makes you more attractive) or focusing on the benefits the consumer will recognize if they use the product/service.
However, DTC pharma advertising is interesting in that they are required by the FDA to lay out the side-effects of their products. They must strike a balance between the benefits and drawbacks that will entice the consumer to still consider trial and adoption. Unfortunately, many pharma products have side-effects that often seem to outweigh the benefits.
Therefore, pharma must rely on more traditional advertising mechanisms such as visual appeal. The best example is the Nasonex bee. The bee floats around flirting with flowers as the voice-over goes into the benefits and side-effects of Nasonex. However, Ruth Day, a professor in Duke University’s Department of Psychology and Nueroscience, found that the bee either a) beat its wings at a higher frequency, or b) flew around the screen more, when side-effects were being disclosed. The argument is consumers would focus on the movement of the bee when it was more active, and therefore pay less attention to the side-effects being discussed.
The point is that creatives are having to turn to cutting-edge cognitive science in an effort to reach out to consumers. I personally would not be surprised if we see an influx of cognitive scientists into advertising over the next decade as we continue to search for new ways to communicate. For a marketing research context, see eye-tracking.
It’s been a couple of weeks since we posted a new infographic. The well seems to have dried up some, so we haven’t really been seeing a lot that wows us. However, that being said, looking through GOOD or Wired is typically a sure bet for finding an interesting image. This week’s image can be found in the current edition of GOOD.
There is a lot of data going on here, but a couple of things are clear. There are simple changes we can make to save a lot of water. Low-flow toilets, faucets, and shower heads are readily available, and many municipalities are offering tax credits if you do so; others are requiring they be installed. Second, it takes a lot of water to produce meat and animal by-products (e.g., eggs). The amount of water required to produce one pound of beef is staggering, and likely the biggest point this infographic is trying to make. Finally, and perhaps most importantly, for one-third less water you get more than two and a half times beer than you would wine (assuming 16 oz. and 6 oz. servings, respectively). Beer geeks rejoice – you can simply call your love for all things beer “environmentally conscious.”
SOURCES: GOOD Magazine; Department of Energy; H2OConserve; IEEE Spectrum; The Water Footprint Network
XKCD is a web-comic with a rather sizable fanbase, particularly among the Digg crowd. For me personally, it’s hit or miss. However, from time to time, a strip comes up that I find both humorous and sometimes informative. Thought I’d share a couple of my favorites.
Statistically Significant
And don’t forget…
Correlation ≠ Causation
It’s only been a couple of weeks since 1234567890 Day, and we already have another “math holiday” upon us. Today is Square Root Day (3/3/09). It only comes around nine times per decade century with the next being April 4, 2016 (4/4/16). Admittedly, this one is kind of weak, but thought I’d share. The math holiday I’m really looking forward to is November 23, 2058 (11/23/58).
Jonah Lehrer, over at The Frontal Cortex, has another great post this week, “Reason, Emotion, and Consumption.” The primary focus of the post is a paper published in the Journal of Economic Research, “In Search of Homo Economicus.” This is cutting edge consumer science with huge dividends to be paid to those who learn its lessons.
The research, conducted by a number of behavioral economists (including Dan Ariely, a graduate of UNC and Duke, both within minutes of our office here in Durham), sought to understand the role cognitive and emotional drivers play in the consumer decision making process. Interestingly, when consumers used unconscious emotions, their decisions were more consistent than when they relied on cognition.
The key here is consistency of decisions made. Brand loyalty is built on consumers consistently choosing the same product. Understanding that emotion, and not cognition, will be the facilitator of loyalty, goes a long way in helping us foster consumer loyalty. We can’t always rely on consumers as rational agents; sometimes we have to appeal emotions that many consider irrational. We must continually strive to know as much about our audiences as possible. This must go beyond demographic and socioeconomic profiling, and focus on psychographics, emotions, behavior, etc. Though a product/offering/company may be superior on paper, it will find little fanfare if it does not adequately stir up the emotions of the consumer.
Over the course of the past year, there have been many attempts to illustrate just how bad this leg of the economic cycle has been. However, this week’s infographic is perhaps the best I’ve yet seen in representing the housing crisis. I’ve said before that the primary purpose of an infographic is to convey a story, and while this infographic may not be the most aesthetically appealing, it certainly serves its purpose very well.
