" ... This campaign season, the newest thing in presidential politics is neuroscience. Driven by new research that suggests monitoring voters' brains, pupils and pulses may be more effective than listening to what they say, EmSense is one of a cottage industry of neuromarketing firms across the country that are pitching their services to presidential campaigns. Seattle's Lucid Systems is trumpeting a biofeedback program that tracks brain waves, pupil dilation, perspiration and facial-muscle movements, while a Chicago company says it is talking to campaigns about its voice-analysis technology, which is used in insurance-fraud cases. Drew Westen, a clinical psychologist at Emory University who has used brain scans to study voters, recently launched Westen Strategies, a consultancy that promises to help clients understand the "neural networks" that govern political behavior. Earlier this year, staffers working for John Edwards flew Mr. Westen in to watch the candidate on the campaign trail and offer feedback (Mr. Westen and a campaign spokesman declined to elaborate). Campaign-strategy consultant, TargetPoint, which is working for Mr. Romney, has begun running Internet surveys that test voters' subconscious impressions and is considering conducting research with brain scanners.
The goal is to deploy the same techniques currently used to track the way consumers respond to cars, perfume, videogames, Web browsers and movie trailers. The information the researchers gather could help candidates make any number of adjustments, including which issues to discuss in which states, what specific terms to use in stump speeches and what cadence or facial expressions to use when delivering them. "Political marketing is a fairly pure analog to commercial marketing," says David Remer, chairman of Lucid Systems. "I'm looking at a package of shampoo the same way I'm looking at my next leader."
Some prominent scientists say neuromarketing firms may be promising more than they can deliver. Liz Phelps, the director of a neuroscience laboratory at New York University who has reviewed recent studies, is critical of the idea that images of brain activity can predict how people will behave -- especially when it comes to politics. Last month, the journal "Nature" criticized a study conducted by a neuromarketing firm this year that had used brain scans to measure people's responses to the 2008 presidential candidates. "Does anyone need a $3 million scanner to conclude that Hillary needs to work on her support from swing voters?" it said.
One reason these tactics are catching on is the increasing wealth of campaigns. According to the Center for Responsive Politics, the candidates have spent $420 million in the first nine months of this year, which is more than double the $182 million spent in the first nine months of 2003. Jon Krosnick, a Stanford political scientist who works with the American National Election Studies, an academic research project that surveys voter attitudes and behaviors, says candidates may be more interested in measuring the deeper biases of voters in a campaign whose contenders include a Mormon, a woman and an African-American. "We need a tricky way to get into people's minds and find out who they're going to vote for instead of asking directly," Mr. Krosnick
says. ... "
~ From Reading the Mind Of the Body Politic ~
No comments:
Post a Comment