This article demonstrates how marketing may benefit from neurophysiology. The authors discuss a particular research case concerning the analysis of a skin care product advertisement. Pretests of 2 versions of this TV ad revealed that, although the versions were almost identical, each of them generated significantly different impact. Their influence was assessed using both cognitive measures (benefits and key benefits recall) and behavioral measures (shelf test). The only difference between these 2 versions of the ad was in a single scene that contained a particular gesture by a female model. Of note, the gesture appeared to enhance the effectiveness of the ad. The authors tested whether neurophysiological measures can capture differences in consumer reactions to slightly different marketing stimuli. Indeed, by using electroencephalography and electromyography and by monitoring skin conductance, the authors were able to register significant differences in neurophysiological reactions to an altered scene, even though the difference was not consciously seen. The authors believe that neurophysiological measures soon will be widely acknowledged and used as a complimentary method in classical marketing research.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

This research uses discrete choice-based conjoint analysis that elicits the preference structure of German citizens when it comes to their timely intention to vaccinate. The focus is on the trade-offs between pharmaceuticals (vaccine) and "non-pharmaceutical interventions" (NPIs) such as lock-downs and social distancing measures, as well as the value of voluntary versus mandatory compliance to the citizens. Our results highlight three critical insights: (a) value of waiting: at 70% effective vaccine, 1/3 of citizens still would prefer to be vaccinated in the next 6 months rather than immediately; (b) costs of NPI constraints: an effective vaccine may come as a solution to compensate for the costs induced by invasive NPI imposed for an extended period; (c) freedom of choice: voluntary compliance is preferred by citizens over imposed measures whether it relates to vaccination choice, lock-down measures, or work location choice during the pandemic. Backing up those findings in monetary value, a quick shot of a 100% effective vaccination is estimated to be worth in the range of 11,400€. Still, the value of the shot quickly falls to no value when effectiveness drops below 50. At the same time, the cost of imposing protective rules lies in the range of 1500–2500€, depending on the rule analyzed. In comparison, the burden of extra complete lock-down and social distancing is about 775€ per citizen per month. As most current vaccines are being proven to have high efficacy, a strategy that selects the most effective vaccine candidates while emphasizing how the vaccine may stop the pain of lasting lock-downs will be appropriate to nudge the population towards vaccination. Control measures that are too restrictive may be welfare-deteriorating, but enough NPI measures must be recommended as long as vaccination adoption is not sufficiently large.