↓ Skip to main content

Neural Correlates of Consumer Buying Motivations: A 7T functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) Study

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neuroscience, September 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
11 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
44 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Neural Correlates of Consumer Buying Motivations: A 7T functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) Study
Published in
Frontiers in Neuroscience, September 2017
DOI 10.3389/fnins.2017.00512
Pubmed ID
Authors

Adam M. Goodman, Yun Wang, Wi-Suk Kwon, Sang-Eun Byun, Jeffrey S. Katz, Gopikrishna Deshpande

Abstract

Consumer buying motivations can be distinguished into three categories: functional, experiential, or symbolic motivations (Keller, 1993). Although prior neuroimaging studies have examined the neural substrates which enable these motivations, direct comparisons between these three types of consumer motivations have yet to be made. In the current study, we used 7 Tesla (7T) functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to assess the neural correlates of each motivation by instructing participants to view common consumer goods while emphasizing either functional, experiential, or symbolic values of these products. The results demonstrated mostly consistent activations between symbolic and experiential motivations. Although, these motivations differed in that symbolic motivation was associated with medial frontal gyrus (MFG) activation, whereas experiential motivation was associated with posterior cingulate cortex (PCC) activation. Functional motivation was associated with dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) activation, as compared to other motivations. These findings provide a neural basis for how symbolic and experiential motivations may be similar, yet different in subtle ways. Furthermore, the dissociation of functional motivation within the DLPFC supports the notion that this motivation relies on executive function processes relatively more than hedonic motivation. These findings provide a better understanding of the underlying neural functioning which may contribute to poor self-control choices.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 44 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 44 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 20%
Student > Master 7 16%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 9%
Researcher 3 7%
Lecturer 2 5%
Other 6 14%
Unknown 13 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 7 16%
Business, Management and Accounting 6 14%
Psychology 6 14%
Engineering 3 7%
Social Sciences 3 7%
Other 6 14%
Unknown 13 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 September 2019.
All research outputs
#6,755,994
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#4,398
of 11,542 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#97,736
of 323,438 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#45
of 158 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,542 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 323,438 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 158 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.