Brain Buys (25 page)

The above experiments rely on
first-order
associative learning: a connection is made between an initially neutral stimulus (the logo) and a pleasant stimulus (the preferred flavor). But in many cases the relationships between packages, brands, logos, taglines, and their perceived desirability are more complex; they rely on so-called second-order associations. In these instances, the “positivity” of one stimulus is transferred to another stimulus through an intermediate one. Figure 7.1 summarizes such a “transfer” experiment performed with five-year-old children. In this study neutral images, such as a square or a circle, were paired with pictures containing some meaning, such as a teddy bear or a crying baby. The picture of the teddy bear was meant to represent a positive stimulus (in the actual study a picture of Ernie from
Sesame Street
was used), while that of the crying baby a negative stimulus (since children can be unpredictable in their likes and dislikes, they were later asked which picture they liked better). The children also learned to associate the square and circle with two additional neutral icons, which again we can think of as two logos. For example, the children were taught that when they were shown a square and given the choice of picking the picture of the teddy bear or the crying baby, they should pick the teddy bear. Altogether they learned the following relationships: square
teddy bear, circle
crying baby; logo A
square, and logo B
circle. Finally, the five-year-olds were asked to choose between two bottles of the same lemonade, one labeled with logo A, the other with logo B. Ninety-one percent of the children wanted the bottle with the icon that had been paired with the picture that they liked the most (generally the teddy bear).
²²

You can see the relevance of these studies to our understanding of why the human brain is vulnerable to marketing. Somewhere within the brains of the children, their neural circuits formed links between square
teddy bear and logo A
square, creating the second-order relationship: logo A
square
teddy bear. After these associations were in place, when faced with deciding which bottle of lemonade to try, these links were sufficient to bias their choice toward the bottle labeled with logo A; it became their preferred “brand.” Whether the associations between brands and positive concepts are acquired through marketing, firsthand experience, or serendipity, they can influence our behavior and decisions. Let’s say I find myself in a supermarket, faced with the choice between two brands of iced tea. The prices and volume are exactly the same, and one brand is called Josu and the other Sujo. Not putting much thought into it I decide to purchase the Josu. Perhaps unconsciously Josu has a better ring to it. Perhaps it sounds cleaner to me because I know “sujo” means “dirty” in Portuguese. The words Josu and Sujo, although entirely irrelevant to the quality of the iced tea can have preexisting associations particular to each consumer. If you find yourself in New Zealand you may be disinclined to pick up the Sars soft drink, or Pee Cola if you find yourself in Ghana. Brand names are critical to marketing success, and a neutral name in one language can be loaded with negative associations in another. This is why numerous companies are exclusively devoted to coming up with names for products, and ensuring that a name is not offensive in a particular language. Note that discriminating against the Sars or Pee Cola brands is irrational; indeed I would venture they are above-average brands if they have survived despite their names, yet due to the associative architecture of the brain, it is inevitable that irrelevant associations will color our opinions and perceptions.

Figure 7.1 A preference transfer experiment in children: Five-year-olds were first taught which of two shapes went together with a corresponding picture—a “positive” (teddy bear) and a “negative” (crying baby) picture. Next they learned that each of two symbols (the “logos” represented by Greek letters) went together with one of the shapes. Finally, the children were asked to choose a glass of lemonade labeled with the logos. Most of the children chose the lemonade with the logo that was indirectly associated with the “positive” picture (teddy bear).

ASSOCIATIONS: A TWO-WAY STREET

Pretty labels and catchy tunes entice us to buy specific products. But associations are a two-way street. Recall that the McGurk illusion demonstrated that what we “hear” depends on whether our eyes are open or closed; because the sound “ba” is generally associated with seeing people close and open their lips, if the visual system does not see the lips come together the brain simply refuses to believe it heard “ba.” The brain cannot help but cross-reference features that are commonly associated with each other; contamination between relevant cues and irrelevant cues is unavoidable. This is why study after study shows that the taste of food is influenced by the package it comes from.

In a typical experiment, people at a supermarket or a mall are asked to sample some food, and the researchers ask shoppers to evaluate the taste of a well-known national brand and a supermarket brand. Of course, the experimenters do the old bait-and-switch. When tasting the national brand, people judge it to be better when it was served from its well-known national package than when it was served from the generic brand package. Similarly, when tasting the actual generic brand, people judge it to taste better when they believe it came from the national package.
²³
The perceived quality of products ranging from brandy to diet mayonnaise is affected by the bottles from which they emerge. And the packaging of a deodorant alters its perceived fragrance and durability.
²⁴
The reasons why packages alter the evaluation of the products is multifactorial but certainly includes previous associations established through experience and marketing. Additionally the color, beauty, or ornateness of a package or bottle can also affect one’s judgment of a product.