Power of Online Persuasion
•Transferir como PPTX, PDF•
1 gostou•1,425 visualizações
The document discusses the power of persuasion and how social psychologists and neuromarketers can learn from each other. It covers two systems of decision making - system 1 which is emotional and fast, and system 2 which is rational and slow. It provides examples of how emotional and rational decisions can be influenced, such as through images, product features, and cognitive dissonance reduction. The document argues that the interaction between these two systems is important and that neuro-marketing and social psychology can inform one another.
Recomendados
Recomendados
Mais conteúdo relacionado
Último
Último (20)
Destaque
Destaque (20)
Power of Online Persuasion
- 1. Power of Persuasion dr. Dirk Franssens BetterChange
- 2. EMERCE CONVERSION 2015 14 APRIL PAKHUIS DE ZWIJGER AMSTERDAM
- 3. Power of Persuasion What Social Psychologists and Neuromarketers can learn from each other!
- 4. EMERCE CONVERSION 2015 14 APRIL PAKHUIS DE ZWIJGER AMSTERDAM Decision making System 1 • Emotional • Fast • Automatic System 2 • Rational • Slow • Deliberative
- 5. EMERCE CONVERSION 2015 14 APRIL PAKHUIS DE ZWIJGER AMSTERDAM
- 6. EMERCE CONVERSION 2015 14 APRIL PAKHUIS DE ZWIJGER AMSTERDAM Emotional decision Happy Healthy Nutritious Balance Fitness Wholesome
- 7. EMERCE CONVERSION 2015 14 APRIL PAKHUIS DE ZWIJGER AMSTERDAM Emotional decision making
- 8. EMERCE CONVERSION 2015 14 APRIL PAKHUIS DE ZWIJGER AMSTERDAM Emotional decision making
- 9. 100% 92% Control Emotional image EMERCE CONVERSION 2015 14 APRIL PAKHUIS DE ZWIJGER AMSTERDAM CR: Buy intention
- 10. EMERCE CONVERSION 2015 14 APRIL PAKHUIS DE ZWIJGER AMSTERDAM Cognitive fluency
- 11. EMERCE CONVERSION 2015 14 APRIL PAKHUIS DE ZWIJGER AMSTERDAM Cognitive fluency
- 12. 100% 120% Control Autocomplete EMERCE CONVERSION 2015 14 APRIL PAKHUIS DE ZWIJGER AMSTERDAM Reber et al., 2004 CR: Buy intention
- 13. EMERCE CONVERSION 2015 14 APRIL PAKHUIS DE ZWIJGER AMSTERDAM Decision making System 1 • Emotional • Fast • Automatic
- 14. EMERCE CONVERSION 2015 14 APRIL PAKHUIS DE ZWIJGER AMSTERDAM Neuromarketing Knutson et al., 2007
- 15. EMERCE CONVERSION 2015 14 APRIL PAKHUIS DE ZWIJGER AMSTERDAM Neuromarketing
- 16. EMERCE CONVERSION 2015 14 APRIL PAKHUIS DE ZWIJGER AMSTERDAM Decision making System 1 • Emotional • Fast • Automatic System 2 • Rational • Slow • Deliberative
- 17. EMERCE CONVERSION 2015 14 APRIL PAKHUIS DE ZWIJGER AMSTERDAM Rational decision Does it fit in our kitchen? It is easy to clean? Which fruits and veggies can I use? I am willing to spend the money?
- 18. EMERCE CONVERSION 2015 14 APRIL PAKHUIS DE ZWIJGER AMSTERDAM Rational decision making
- 19. EMERCE CONVERSION 2015 14 APRIL PAKHUIS DE ZWIJGER AMSTERDAM Rational decision making
- 20. 100% 120% Control No features EMERCE CONVERSION 2015 14 APRIL PAKHUIS DE ZWIJGER AMSTERDAM Reber et al., 2004 CR: Buy intention 92%
- 21. EMERCE CONVERSION 2015 14 APRIL PAKHUIS DE ZWIJGER AMSTERDAM Rational decision making
- 22. EMERCE CONVERSION 2015 14 APRIL PAKHUIS DE ZWIJGER AMSTERDAM Rational decision making
- 23. EMERCE CONVERSION 2015 14 APRIL PAKHUIS DE ZWIJGER AMSTERDAM Rational decision making
- 24. 100% 110% 95% Control Good USP's Bad USP's EMERCE CONVERSION 2015 14 APRIL PAKHUIS DE ZWIJGER AMSTERDAM CR: Buy intention
- 25. EMERCE CONVERSION 2015 14 APRIL PAKHUIS DE ZWIJGER AMSTERDAM Decision making System 1 • Emotional • Fast • Automatic System 2 • Rational • Slow • Deliberative
- 26. EMERCE CONVERSION 2015 14 APRIL PAKHUIS DE ZWIJGER AMSTERDAM It is the interaction! Perception Reasoning Behavioral decision Behavioral schemata Behavior Associative store Intending Representations Spreading activation Spreading activation Knowledge System 1 System 2 Strack, Werth, & Deutsch, 2006
- 27. EMERCE CONVERSION 2015 14 APRIL PAKHUIS DE ZWIJGER AMSTERDAM Cognitive Dissonance Reduction
- 28. EMERCE CONVERSION 2015 14 APRIL PAKHUIS DE ZWIJGER AMSTERDAM Searching for arguments
- 29. EMERCE CONVERSION 2015 14 APRIL PAKHUIS DE ZWIJGER AMSTERDAM Searching for arguments
- 30. 100% 169% Control Text balloon EMERCE CONVERSION 2015 14 APRIL PAKHUIS DE ZWIJGER AMSTERDAM CR: Buy intention
- 31. EMERCE CONVERSION 2015 14 APRIL PAKHUIS DE ZWIJGER AMSTERDAM Searching for arguments
- 32. EMERCE CONVERSION 2015 14 APRIL PAKHUIS DE ZWIJGER AMSTERDAM Arguments at Amazon!
- 33. EMERCE CONVERSION 2015 14 APRIL PAKHUIS DE ZWIJGER AMSTERDAM Which one did she buy?
- 34. EMERCE CONVERSION 2015 14 APRIL PAKHUIS DE ZWIJGER AMSTERDAM Decision making Neuro- marketing Social Psychology
- 35. www.betterchange.nl dirk@betterchange.nl @dxfranssens nl.linkedin.com/in/dirkfranssens EMERCE CONVERSION 2015 14 APRIL PAKHUIS DE ZWIJGER AMSTERDAM
Notas do Editor
- In CRO we have to understand how people make buy decisions. A very well know theory is that of system 1 (emotions) and system 2 (rational). Those that understand the interaction between system 1 and system 2 are the ones who truly understand the power of persuasion!
- My girlfriend Anna wanted to buy a juices for about a month. She kept on talking about it and also kept on providing argument to me why she really needed the juicer.
- Over the past months I repeatedly asked her why she would like to have such a big machine, isn’t it way too much work to clean, does not fit in our kitchen, etc. Se said: no I want to feel healthier and more balanced. She started showing me images of other people using it (on women blogs) and when I pressed her she said: I want to be like them. So perhaps we need to tap much more into emotions, for example by using a different feature image.
- When you look at our product detail page, there is not much emotion here. You see a clean and static product image and the content does not seem to tap into the emotions mentioned by Anna. To test the effect of emotions we substituted the functional product image with a more emotional image where you see an actual consumer using the product.
- This image was meant to communicate the juicer in action, you see lots of healthy fruits and vegetable and you see light coming into the kitchen.
- This did not show a positive effect on Buy intention. That does not mean that emotions do not play a role, it means that the image itself does not tap into the relevant emotions.
- System 1 is not jus about emotions, is also about usability and how easy it is for consumers to reach their goal. This is called Cognitive Fluency. CF basically says that the easier it is to reach a goal, the more positive emotion one experiences. This positive emotions is than attributed not to the ease of processing but to the product they are looking at.
- It’s not just about emotions, it is about removing friction. By reducing friction you increase cognitive fluency. Consumers experience a positive emotion and mistakenly attribute this as a positive attitude towards the product.
- So we know that system 1 as a decision modus influences outcomes of our decisions.
- There is also cognitive neuroscience evidence for system 1 processing. Here you see the results of seminal study conducted by Knutson and colleagues. This study shows that consumer buying is a tradeoff between pleasure of getting something versus the pain of paying. These types of studies are more and more conducted and we get a better understanding of what emotions facilitate consumer decision making.
- Studies conducted by Neurensics show that 13 emotions are involved in consumer decision making. This spider graph also shows what emotions should be highly active and which ones we should avoid triggering. In principle we should focus on gains and avoid the pains of buying.
- So we know that system 1 is an important influencer of our decision. And we have seen cognitice neuroscience evidence that system 1 indeed is an important influencer on decision making. But does that automatically mean system 2 processes are not relevant, as many bloggers seem to suggest lately? I am going to argument that system 2 also is very important. System 2 not only acts as our rationality providing arguments for a purchase decision, our system 2 actually influences our emotions. I will show you that this can have far reaching consequences in consumer decision making.
- Back to Anna. She decided to buy the juicer and of course wanted to buy to most expensive one. Even though buying a juicer taps into her emotions like feeling healthier and more balanced, rational arguments also play an important role: for example easiness to clean, does it fit in my kitchen, or even as simple as is it OK to spend so much money just on feeling good.
- When you leave out product features conversions decrease. So text + arguments are important. Anna wants to know whether this product is right for her.
- Thus, this AB test shows that providing arguments is indeed important when convincing Anna to buy a juicer.
- Let’s put the USP’s closer to the buy buttons so that consumers can more easily evaluate the arguments when making a buy decision.
- These are more consumer oriented USP’s such as no nipple irritation, natural feeling, soft cushion, etc.
- These were more technical
- This test shows not only that arguments are relevant, but also the interplay between arguments and emotions. Only when the arguments increase pleasure of buying and reduces pain of buying do they positively impact consumer buying decision.
- To recapitulate, both system 1 and system 2 are important in consumer decision making. The last AB test showed how both systems can interact with each other.
- And that is precisely what both social scientist and cognitive neuromarketers are saying: the interaction between system 1 and system 2 is important to understand. Reflective Impulsive Model on Decision Making.
- The behavior change technique is actually called cognitive dissonance reduction. What social psychologist have know for a long time, and there is now also evidence from cognitive neuroscience, that humans are always busy aligning decision (emotions) with their attitude or cognitions (ratio). Marketers have known this for a long time. Anna was trying really hard to reduce her feelings of dissonance. What she was looking for were arguments to help change her attitudes towards the more expensive product.
- Back to Anna. She made the emotional decision that she wants to feel balanced etc., but also wanted to make sure the product does what she wants. Anna of course wanted to buy the most expensive juicer. She went looking for arguments to justify her decision to buy the expensive juicer. This means comparing products play an important part in the customer journey of Anna. At the same time, we know that Anna was experiencing cognitive dissonance to buy the expensive juicer. This feeling can be powerful and we should therefore tap into that feeling to persuade consumers to compare and hence reduce their cognitive dissonance.
- She wanted to compare products hoping to find arguments as to why she needs the more expensive juicer. In order to make the process more easy for her we installed a text balloon that taps into the feeling of cognitive dissonance.
- People start comparing more so comparing is important functionality. Also, Anna was looking for arguments to buy the more expensive one, so she went to the comparison page to look for arguments.
- Now, remember for Anna this was a product with high involvement. That means she felt lots of dissonance. You could see that by her visiting Amazon again, google on difference between products, and expressing doubt whether she is making the right decision. Metal is more stable, better quality materials, better motor, etc. The difference between 900 watt and 1000 watt was unclear, what justifies the difference Reviews why the more expensive juicer is much better. We are not yet able to conduct these kinds of test because copy is not scalable, technique does not allow for easy adjusting of content, etc.
- In the end, Anna bought the cheaper one. Her search for arguments (i.e. her system 2) convinced her to not buy the expensive one she initially wanted to buy. Here you see how that she lacked arguments to reduce the pain of paying. So her arguments actually influenced her emotions.
- My conclusion is that real optimization experts do not solely focus on system 1 decisions. We make sure we understand both system and how they work together and influence each other. And that is what I think neuromarketers and social psychologists can learn from each other: stop focusing on one system and start learning the interaction between the two because only then you can really use the power of persuasion!