why using neuro research

Neuro Research Background
Eye square was one of the first companies in Europe to utilize the eye tracking methodology in market research approximately 10 years ago. We have seen the uprise and the hype around eye tracking, and finally its establishment as a serious component in many user experience studies. We started applying alternative neuro methods, such as EEG and GSR 3 years ago, and currently see it passing through the same phase of euphemism and hype, as eye tracking did some years ago.
There is a fascinating ambiguity about the usage of neuroscience in marketing, product development, and recently user experience. On the one hand managers are obsessed with the tools and their semblance of objectivity and true science. Decision makers feel extremely empowered by using techniques like EEG, because they believe to be able to get a complete unbiased view into the formerly hidden mind of their consumers. Neuromethods, however, often do not stand these expectations of salvation. Consequently, the initial wow effect can turn into disappointment and rejection. Buyers of marketing research feel that they have not received what was promised to them. To avoid such upside down effects, a careful integration and a clear understanding of the potential added value is a necessary precondition for a successful neuro project.
Our past experiences with neuro indicators like EEG, GSR, and eye tracking give us confidence that those tools indeed have a clear surplus regarding data validity, applicability, and creative inspiration. Our experience is that they indeed provide a high level of validity since they are able to avoid the willing and able problem of explicit, verbal data. Results typically lead to clear and highly applicable insights and last but not least they provide a new perspective which could lead to more creative and cutting edge solutions.



How do you see NeuroExperience research evolving in the new few years?
We expect NeuroExperience research to follow the same path as eye tracking did a few years ago. A growing number of applications will render it easier to decide, when and in which way the application of EEG is sensible for a given research question. We expect market researchers and their clients to become increasingly educated about the pros and cons of the application of neuro methods in user experience research. In the long run, the more practical neuro methods in terms of equipment size, portability, participant demands etc. will establish as methods pari passu in the portfolio of market research companies, together with traditional methods, and eye tracking.
At the same time solutions become cheaper and easier to apply, therefore more and more market research companies will offer neuro research services. However, since neuro research is a complex field of reseach a high level of expertise is necessary, as well as careful research planning in order to extract meaningful results from the data. Therefore a shift from “we can do neuro research” towards “we deliver high quality neuro research” is the way to go for successful players in the field.
From eye tracking studies we know that a crucial success criterion for a neuro research project is method triangulation. It makes little sense to conduct neuro-only studies, because the data doesn’t speak for itself. eye square will continue to integrate neuro indicators into existing paradigms of user experience research. Without the qualitative and explicit data from interviews etc. a neuro-only study could cause disappointments.
The application of neuro methods to user experience research requires a quite different approach than advertising, brand and other forms of consumer research. Whereas the latter are concerned with understanding a low involvement reception situation, user research in virtually all cases deals with high involvement situations. If somebody is interacting with with a mobile device, he is highly concentrated on what he is doing at that moment. This leads to the need for a different framework of interpretation of indicators: whereas advertising is regarded successful when there is relatively more activity in the brain, in user experience research its likely to be the other way round. A successful interaction is reflected by low attention or a low cognitive workload.

What UX questions can NeuroExperience techniques answer that other UX techniques can’t?

Neuro data help to detect issues beyond the conscious awareness of the user. This a very valuable source of information especially for companies who work in an established field like online shopping. Neuro data can give guidance even if classical usability methods fail to detect any issues, because they can be more precise and specific.
Since neuro data reflect the neuronal responses to concrete events in the actual interaction with a device or software, resulting data can be mapped very clearly on the user interface. Just as eye tracking, neuro data can be reported in a visual language which is especially intuitive for designers. Graphical representations of problems and pitfalls in the tested interface fit very well in designers way of thinking and hence helps to inspire them.

How do I make a case for the ROI of doing NeuroExperience research?
In saturated markets, in situations of repeated exposure to e.g. an ecommerce website, small incremental improvements which happen on the verge of the customer’s perception can render the website easier to use and this without customers being able to say why this is so. In this sense, neuro data could tell a different story than task completion rates and standardized usability ratings. In these situations NeuroExperience research generates a ROI by improving website usability at a fine grained level.
We also found neuro research methods useful to assess intercultural differences. For instance we found several differences between Asian and European mobile phone users. Language and cultural differences can render verbal protocols of usability testing sessions quite different, thus complicating the analysis.