The role of emotion in marketing communication is widely acknowledged as a positive influence. This article delves into the two academically supported origins of this belief, with a particular focus on measurement.

Recap of Part One: Behavior Previously, we examined the positive impact of emotion on consumer behavior and decision-making. This article continues the exploration, emphasizing the two academic foundations supporting the significance of emotion in marketing: its role in decision-making and its contribution to memory formation.

Challenges in Measuring Emotion Historically, focus groups were commonly employed for testing emotional responses in concept testing or advertising pre-testing. Creatives and brand owners often discussed testing the "emotional territory" and sought to elicit specific emotions linked to buyer behavior. However, contemporary scientific understanding challenges the efficacy of using qualitative research for pre-testing emotional elicitation.

Experts emphasize that only a small percentage of emotions progress to conscious feelings, and the average consumer's interaction with a brand does not necessarily lead to conscious emotions. Asking focus group participants to articulate their feelings often yields rational responses rather than tapping into genuine emotions.

The Limitations of Focus Groups While focus groups may serve a purpose in developing hypotheses or providing directional insights, the article highlights the impracticality of relying on participants to express their emotions. Drawing an analogy, it suggests that asking a focus group participant to verbalize emotions is akin to asking a tennis player to explain the non-conscious application of geometric principles during a game.

Neuroscientific Insights Neuroscience has revealed that there is no direct neural pathway between the emotional processor (amygdala) and verbal expression. Attempting to prompt participants to articulate emotions in a focus group setting, especially within an artificial environment, proves ineffective.

Challenges in Focus Group Dynamics The article addresses the long-standing tension between the creative fraternity and marketing researchers, with creatives accusing researchers of meddling in the creative process without accountability. This dynamic often results in subjective opinions rather than objective insights.

Quoting an expert, it notes, "Having a voice without accountability; a voice that often yields not much more than yet another subjective opinion."

Product-Led vs. Needs-Based Innovation in Measuring Emotion The article discusses the shift in focus from product-led to needs-based innovation in measuring emotion. A decade ago, numerous conferences explored emotion measurement, but the high attrition rate among innovators has left only a few firms globally in the discussion. The economic challenges and limited returns have led to a reevaluation of the purpose and effectiveness of such endeavors.

Product-Led Approach: Physiological Measures Fifteen years ago, vendors promoted the incorporation of emotion into marketing measurement, offering output from physiological measurement techniques such as MRI, EEG, and MEG. While these approaches revealed physiological arousal to advertising, their limitations became evident, as they could not measure discrete emotions and were restricted to measuring emotional arousal and valence.

Quoting the article, "The techniques had one thing in common; they could not measure discrete emotions."

The Flaws of Moment-by-Moment Measurement Moment-by-moment measurement faced criticism for its limited diagnostic value, akin to measuring a paragraph word-by-word. Despite claims of detecting emotional presence and characterizing neural processing, the inability to determine specific emotions remained a major limitation.

Quoting the article, "The blanket assertion that avoidance signaled a negative outcome for marketing communication."

Final Thoughts

the article underscores the ongoing challenges in accurately measuring emotions for marketing purposes, emphasizing the need for a more nuanced and context-aware approach.