Original Article

Unconscious mental processes in

consumer choice: Toward a new
model of consumer behavior
Received (in revised form): 15th January 2011

Neale Martin
is a Professor of Innovation Management at the Coles College of Business at Kennesaw State University in Atlanta,
Georgia, and CEO of Sublime Behavior Marketing, a consulting and education firm. His book Habit: The 95% of
Behavior Marketers Ignore updates the principles of marketing in light of research from cognitive psychology and
neuroscience that suggest that most of human behavior is under the sway of unconscious habits. As a speaker,
trainer and consultant, Martin has been helping companies adjust their strategic marketing in the face of rapid change
since 1995.

Kyle Morich
is the co-founder and Vice President of Sublime Behavior Marketing and has worked as the primary editor and
researcher for Neale Martin’s book Habit: The 95% of Behavior Marketers Ignore. Morich graduated from the Goizueta
Business School at Emory University in Atlanta, and before founding Sublime spent several years as a management
consultant specializing in product segmentation analysis and marketing organization optimization for clients in the
consumer packaged goods industry. He is also an amateur triathlete, and completed his first Half-Ironman distance race
in the fall of 2010.

ABSTRACT Theories of consumer behavior often posit that consumers are rational
agents making conscious decisions about the branded products and services they
purchase and use. It is assumed that consumer decisions are preceded by an explicit
formation of attitudes and needs that determine the brand of choice. However,
research from the domain of automaticity proposes that the majority, if not all,
of human behavior either begins as an unconscious process or occurs completely
outside of conscious awareness. These automatic processes, including behavioral
mimicry, trait and stereotype activation, and nonconscious goal pursuit, also impact
attitudes, beliefs and goals without engaging consumers’ conscious minds. Habits, a
special type of automaticity, are behaviors completely controlled by contextual stimuli;
habits occur outside of goals and intentions. In light of the evidence for the primacy
of unconscious behavior, this article proposes a new model of consumer behavior that
dynamically incorporates both conscious and unconscious mental processes to
represent how consumers make brand decisions in the context of their daily lives.
Journal of Brand Management (2011) 18, 483–505. doi:10.1057/bm.2011.10;
published online 18 March 2011
Correspondence:
Neale Martin
Management & Entrepreneurship
Department, 1000 Chastain Rd., Keywords: consumer behavior; habits; unconscious behavior; marketing; branding;
Kennesaw, Georgia 30144-5591,
USA consumer behavior model

© 2011 Macmillan Publishers Ltd. 1350-23IX Journal of Brand Management Vol. 18, 7, 483–505

www.palgrave-journals.com/bm/
Martin and Morich

A CONSCIOUS CONSUMER? in modeling a wide variety of complex

systems from the weather to cotton prices
Chaos theory and academic inertia (Lorenz, 1993). We argue that the prepon-
derance of marketing concepts, theories of
First, we assume that buying behavior
consumer behavior and models of both
is rational in the sense that it is within
have been profoundly shaped by the
the buyer’s ‘bounded rationality;’ that is,
assumption of a conscious consumer built
his behavior is rational within the limits
into Howard and Sheth’s (1969) original
of his cognitive and learning capacities
work. This assumption was perceived as the
and within the constraint of limited
normative interpretation of the human
information. (Howard and Sheth, A Theory
condition until countervailing research
of Buyer Behavior (1969))
from the past 10 to 15 years began to reveal
This initial assumption posited by John that human behavior often occurs outside
Howard and Jagdish Sheth in their seminal conscious awareness and intent.
work A Theory of Buyer Behavior has shaped In the first part of this article, we will
and influenced the theoretical and practical review the implications of this primal
approach to consumer behavior for 40 assumption on the field of marketing. In
years. The idea that consumers are rational the next section, we will review research
agents making conscious decisions has from numerous disciplines that conclusively
formed the foundations of multiple studies demonstrates the fallacy that consumers
of consumer behavior (Bargh, 2002), yet are primarily rational agents making con-
recent research from across multiple disci- scious decisions. The subsequent section
plines clearly demonstrates that most human proposes a new model of consumer behavior
behavior is not cognitively motivated and that dynamically incorporates both con-
is instead the result of unconscious mental scious and unconscious mental processes
processes (Bargh and Chartrand, 1999; in both purchase and use.
Dijksterhuis et al, 2005; Dijksterhuis and
Nordgren, 2006; Bargh and Morsella, 2009; The implications of the assumption
Wood and Neal, 2009; Dijksterhuis et al, of the rational, cognitive consumer
in press). Howard and Sheth’s assumption The pervasiveness of Howard and Sheth’s
of rational behavior can be seen as a logical original assumption of a rational consumer
extension of ‘Homo economicus’, a term can be seen in current textbooks on
widely used in economics for more than a marketing and consumer behavior:
century to describe the nature of humans
as rational actors narrowly focused on their The consumer decision making process. When
own self-interest (Persky, 1995). buying products, consumers generally follow
A core principle of chaos theory is sen- the consumer decision-making process:
sitive dependence on initial conditions (1) need recognition, (2) information search,
(Gleick, 1987). Scientists discovered that (3) evaluation of alternatives, (4) purchase, and
very small differences in the starting point (5) postpurchase behavior. (Lamb et al, 2010)
of a process with numerous iterations create
significant and unpredictable results. The We define consumer behavior as the
key insight of chaos theory is that the con- behavior that consumers display in searching
ditions at the beginning of a complex for, purchasing, using, evaluating, and
process powerfully determine the future disposing of products and services that they
state of the system. Often referred to as the expect will satisfy their needs. (Schiffman
butterfly effect, this process has been found and Kanuk, 2009)

484 © 2011 Macmillan Publishers Ltd. 1350-23IX Journal of Brand Management Vol. 18, 7, 483–505
Unconscious mental processes in consumer choice

The assumption that ‘need recognition’ is But what if consumer behavior is not
the beginning of consumer behavior is cer- the result of a consciously perceived need?
tainly logical. This logic appears to be the What if the behavior of going to the fridge
way we experience the world. A consumer and grabbing a cold bottle of beer was a
becomes aware of a need, and then starts completely unconscious process, driven by
looking around for ways to fulfill that need. automatic responses to stimulus cues within
He gets thirsty, goes to the fridge and looks the environmental context? What if rational
at the cans of soda, jugs of water, containers thought and perception of a ‘satisfied need’
of juice and bottles of beer and decides only showed up later in a process that psy-
which product would best slake his thirst. chologists refer to as post hoc rationalization?
Marketers, in turn, create organizational Significant research across multiple disci-
structures to match this perceived reality. plines indicates that this scenario – the
Market research affects what features and consumer is not consciously aware of his
benefits consumers are seeking in their bev- actions – is the more likely case.
erage choices by surveying the preferences This counterintuitive reality in which
of thousands of people each year. Product unconscious processes drive the majority of
Development works tirelessly to create the daily behavior calls into question the very
attributes that market research identifies foundation of our traditional marketing
as critical to consumers, and then tests these approach. Surveying consumers assumes
concepts out on subjects. Once a con- that they can consciously identify why they
vincing majority of test subjects indicate a choose a particular beverage, they are aware
strong willingness to purchase, the new of the attributes and the critical thresholds
product is introduced to the marketplace for those attributes, and even remember
(under ideal situations anyway). Then what they chose. If the information uncov-
Advertising spends millions of dollars clev- ered by market research is unreliable, then
erly communicating those attributes in an product developers may create the wrong
attempt to make consumers aware of their product. And all the money spent on adver-
unmet needs, influence their purchase deci- tising is falling on deaf ears and blind eyes
sions and induce trial of the new product. of unconscious consumers engrained in
A logical process flow is built around a their habitual shopping behaviors.
logical understanding of how the consumer Post-purchase evaluation must also be
behaves. This organizational design around questioned. Satisfaction of needs and wants
a rigid understanding of consumer behavior is often used as the very definition of mar-
was not without precedent. Another long- keting (Chartered Institute of Marketing,
standing decision-making framework, the 2010). The current assumption is that the
Hierarchy of Effects (‘Attention, Interest, consumer considers her options, makes a
Desire and Action’), was designed less as a conscious choice and then evaluates whether
concrete map of consumer behavior but as this choice resulted in a satisfactory out-
a means to standardize the tactics of sales- come. But if the purchase or usage behavior
people. From Frederick Sheldon, author of was not driven by conscious intent, then
the Art of Selling: ‘ … the customer … is how useful is measuring satisfaction?
persuaded to make a purchase because you Marketers define satisfaction in terms of
follow the right method. You do not try a confirmation or disconfirmation of expec-
to make him take action before you have tations (Fornell, 1996). If a product or
stimulated his desire; and you do not try service matches expectations, it results in
to create desire until you have secured his satisfaction. A failure to meet expectations
interest’ (see Barry, 1987). results in dissatisfaction; and if a product

© 2011 Macmillan Publishers Ltd. 1350-23IX Journal of Brand Management Vol. 18, 7, 483–505 485
Martin and Morich

exceeds expectation, a consumer might be UNDERSTANDING UNCONSCIOUS

very satisfied. Achieving customer satisfac- CONSUMER BEHAVIOR
tion is believed important to getting repeat
purchase and loyalty (Fornell, 2007). How- Fearing the unknown
ever, after years of prioritizing customer Discussions of the unconscious motivations
satisfaction, there is little evidence to sup- and behaviors of consumers tend to invoke
port the linkage between satisfaction and Vance Packards 1957 book The Hidden
future behavior (Neal, 1999). Persuaders and the purported success of James
The only measure of satisfaction that Vicary’s subliminal advertising carried out
seems to predict repurchase is ‘delight’, a in Fort Lee, New Jersey. Vicary stated that
mercurial measure at best. If delight results he had flashed words on the movie screen
from exceeding expectations, consumers at 1/3000 of second (‘Drink Coca Cola’,
likely revise their expectations in light of and ‘Hungry? Eat Popcorn’), and the sales
this feedback, making the future chance of soda increased by 57.8 and 18.1 per cent,
of failing to meet expectations more and respectively. Although this experiment was
more certain. But because ‘delight’ influ- later found to be a hoax and attempts to
ences repurchase positively, many compa- replicate the experiment showed little to
nies have ‘delighting customers’ as part of no impact of subliminal messages, the
their advertising, not realizing that elevating lasting effect has been an inherent distrust
customer expectation makes delight that of consumer research that deals with the
much more difficult to achieve. unconscious mind (Bargh, 2002). It is not
Once again, the realization that the uncommon today to see pejorative references
consumer’s behavior is not the result of to the study of unconscious consumer
conscious intention explains much of satis- behavior, such as ‘brandwashing’, within
faction’s shortcomings. If a particular con- major publications such as the New York
sumer behavior was unconscious, there was Times (for example, Singer, 2010).
no preliminary setting of expectations to Unconscious behavior associates fre-
compare against product performance. quently with studies of our brain’s primitive
The flawed assumption of ever-conscious stimulus–response reactions, such as condi-
decision making is not limited to marketers; tioning a subject to blink automatically to
consumers assume the same thing as well. a tone that had been previously paired with
Researchers asking consumers about their a puff-of-air to the eye (Woodruff-Pak and
preferences, intentions to purchase and Steinmetz, 2000). Other popular descrip-
satisfaction will receive answers. Unfortu- tions of the brain’s unconscious processes
nately, for these researchers, the bulk of include ‘emotional’ (LeDoux, 1996) and
these responses represent the post hoc ration- ‘irrational’ (Ariely, 2008) terms that mini-
alization of the consumer, an attempt to mize the importance, richness and com-
rationally explain behavior that was largely plexity of mental processes that are not
unconscious (Dijksterhuis et al, in press). available to unconscious inspection. The
Need recognition, search, evaluation and popular portrayal of the unconscious as
satisfaction are all natural extensions of the illogical and unable to handle flexible, com-
idea that consumers are rational agents plex decision making, combined with the
making conscious decisions to purchase and regular assertion that attempts to influence
use products. The influences of these con- these nonconcious processes is manipula-
cepts are pervasive through every aspect of tive and immoral, has hindered the expan-
marketing and are implicated in some of sion of unconscious research into commercial,
marketing’s most persistent shortcomings. consumer-centered applications. As such,

486 © 2011 Macmillan Publishers Ltd. 1350-23IX Journal of Brand Management Vol. 18, 7, 483–505
Unconscious mental processes in consumer choice

the majority of consumer research remains making ignores millions of years of brain
focused on consciously motivated and evolution (Steen, 2007). Our human ances-
deliberately executed purchase and usage tors used their conscious minds to hunt,
decisions (Bargh, 2002). whereas their unconscious minds moni-
In reality, consciousness is, in evolu- tored the surroundings for danger and
tionary terms, notably late to the informa- predators. The same dual-brain systems
tion-processing party. For millions of years, exist today, only now we use our conscious
unconscious systems controlled intelligent mind to talk on the phone, whereas our
life (Steen, 2007). Subjective experience unconscious minds drive our two-ton auto-
from within a conscious system prevents us mobiles down crowded highways (Martin,
from truly imaging an ‘unconscious life’, 2007). As much as unconscious behavior
yet each day trillions of creatures, including may imply a lack of control or, to some, a
humans, perform a wide range of behaviors denial of free will, we could not survive
unconsciously (Bargh and Morsella, 2009). without it.
Defining consciousness itself proves to be Over the past three decades, researchers
a difficult task, with philosophers and neu- across multiple disciplines have greatly
roscientists alike struggling to understand improved our understanding of uncon-
its limits, qualities and the extent of its con- scious behavior, yet consumer research
trol over our actions (Dennett, 1991; Crick continues to rely on models that support
and Koch, 1998). Although arguments on consciously made, deliberate choices and
the nature of consciousness are valuable, for decisions. The integration of unconscious
the purposes of this article we agree with research into models of the consumer deci-
Steen’s (2007) general definition of con- sion-making process is long overdue.
sciousness as a combination of attention,
perception, memory and, most importantly,
awareness. Applying automaticity to consumer
As mentioned in the introduction, the behavior
cognitive bias of consumer research begins Unconscious behavior, by definition, is not
with need recognition as the starting point available to direct conscious introspection.
for consumer behavior. Continuing through The study of automaticity, or the automatic
the purchase process, market researchers processes executed by the unconscious
then assume that before people buy, choose mind, focuses on how environmental
or decide on a product or service, they features (A) trigger automatic processes (B)
engage in conscious information processing that result in some outcome (C) (Figure 1).
(Chaiken, 1980; Petty et al, 1983). Informa- According to Bargh (1994), automatic
tion processing then may lead to attitude behavior is defined by four components: a
formation, and those attitudes, in turn, to lack of awareness, unintentionally initiated,
decisions. Although useful, the assumption efficient and effortless, and out of personal
of information processing is also dangerous. control. However, not all four need to be
Painting a picture of a conscious shopper present for a process to be automatic, and
basing her decisions on the pros and cons they rarely are. An accomplished guitar
of a product and service (Dijksterhuis et al, player does not need to consciously mon-
2005) removes or dramatically minimizes the itor his strumming; the play is automatic
possibility of variables outside of conscious (marked by efficiency). He is, however,
awareness influencing or motivating behavior. certainly aware that he is playing the guitar,
Minimizing the influence of unconscious started playing on purpose and could stop
behavior as a factor in consumer decision at any time.

© 2011 Macmillan Publishers Ltd. 1350-23IX Journal of Brand Management Vol. 18, 7, 483–505 487
Martin and Morich

Environmental Automatic
Outcome (C)
Features (A) Processes (B)

• Social situations • Attitude activation • Behavior

• Events • Evaluation & emotion • Motivation
• Other people • Behavioral mimicry • Judgments
• Objects • Trait & stereotype activation • Decisions
• Places • Nonconscious goal pursuit • Emotions

Figure 1: The diagram of automatic behavior (Chartrand, 2005).

The average grocery store is a building We will introduce research from two
with nearly 50 000 square feet of space and broad areas of automaticity that directly
over 45 000 SKUs on its shelves (see the affect the study of consumer behavior. We
Food Marketing Institute, 2008). A fully will review some of the automatic processes
conscious consumer, rationally assessing her that unconsciously impact the attitudes,
needs before making a decision (comparing beliefs and goals that lead to consumer
prices, evaluating food labels, considering outcomes. We will also discuss habits, a
alternatives and so on), would be quickly certain type of automaticity that generates
overwhelmed by sensory overload and cog- unconscious behaviors outside of goals and
nitive limitations. Yet in an average shop- intentions.
ping trip, a mom needs just 25 min to
identify and purchase the 30 or so items Automatic processes that impact
she needs. All but a few of these items have attitudes, beliefs and goals
likely been purchased with very little New product introductions fail at a spec-
awareness into the processes that drove her tacular rate of 80 per cent (Cooper, 2001),
decisions. These choices ‘are introspectively whereas the best companies manage to get
blank’ (Dijksterhuis et al, 2005). This cog- their success rates somewhere around 50
nitive efficiency occurs over time as behav- per cent. Understanding the factors that
iors are repeated in stable contexts. drive consumer purchase decisions is the
Bargh (1994) describes three categoriza- Holy Grail for marketers, brand managers
tions for lack of awareness. First, the person and product designers. A blueprint of a
is unaware of the stimulus that drove the consumer’s attitudes, beliefs and goals
process. Second, the person does not know would provide endless opportunities to
how the stimulus is interpreted and catego- create the perfect products and services
rized. Third, the person is unaware of what and deliver billions of dollars in annual
specifically influenced his judgments and revenue.
feelings and mistakenly applies some other Yet the tools market researchers prima-
salient cause that she is aware of. The rily deploy, such as surveys, focus groups
problem with consumer research is that and laboratory tests, rely on consumers to
consumers often fall into this third category. consciously access and explain their opin-
A shopper will rarely indicate that she ions and needs. Some researchers are begin-
does not know why she purchased a ning to incorporate observation techniques
certain brand of detergent or chose apples and deep interviewing to access insights
instead of oranges. She will more likely beyond the conscious level. And as automa-
come up with a plausible reason that may ticity research has demonstrated, consumers
have had no actual impact on her purchase often do not have access to the internal
decision. mechanisms that drive their decisions.

488 © 2011 Macmillan Publishers Ltd. 1350-23IX Journal of Brand Management Vol. 18, 7, 483–505
Unconscious mental processes in consumer choice

Three particular forms of automaticity – and Moore, 1977, 1983). In turn, mothers
behavioral mimicry, trait and stereotype mimic their babies, opening their mouths
activation,and nonconscious goal pursuit – as their babies begin to feed (O’Toole and
indicate that consumer attitudes, beliefs and Dubin, 1968). Mimicry also occurs between
goals can be modified or changed through complete strangers. Chartrand and Bargh
environmental features and other factors (1999) paired strangers in a discussion on
outside conscious control. photographs and had confederates either
rub their face or shake their foot. Partici-
pants paired with face-rubbing confederates
Behavioral mimicry rubbed their faces more and those paired
Laboratory experiments, PET scans and with foot-shaking confederates were more
fMRI have found evidence for ‘mirror likely to shake their feet. Participants were
neurons’, groups of neurons that become unaware they were mimicking the other
active when we perceive the behavior of person.
another. These neurons activate the same It appears that mimicry almost functions
areas of the premotor cortex that are active as ‘social glue’, binding groups together
when we perform the behaviors ourselves and encouraging harmonious relationships
(Fadiga et al, 1995; Decety and Grezes, (Lakin et al, 2003). It increases our liking
1999; Iacoboni et al, 1999). and rapport in our relationships (Chartrand
As our behavior and our perception of and Bargh, 1999), as well as how we treat
others’ behavior co-occupy many of the others. Van Baaren et al (2003) conducted
same brain regions, perception often affects an experiment in a restaurant environment
our behavior directly and unconsciously. to examine how verbal mimicry would
Called the ‘Perception–Behavior Link’, we influence the diners’ tipping of their
very often do what we see (Dijksterhuis and waitresses. They discovered that when a
Bargh, 2001). This link affects behaviors waitress mimicked her customers (by
ranging from basic motor movements to repeating their orders word-for-word), she
elaborate intrapersonal behavior patterns received significantly higher tips than when
(Dijksterhuis et al, 2005). One form of imi- she did not (by paraphrasing their orders).
tation is the automatic mimicry of the Mimicry also impacts consumption.
observable behavior of others. Johnston (2002) demonstrates that people
Mimicry occurs throughout almost every tend to eat more ice cream when someone
facet of human interaction. We imitate across the table from them eats a larger por-
speech, facial expressions, postures and tion of ice cream. But the more important
gestures (Chartrand et al, 2005). We mimic question for marketers is ‘does mimicry
the laughter of others (Young and Frye, influence a consumer’s preference for a
1966), and although we deride the tackiness product?’ In another consumption experi-
of television shows that use ‘canned ment (Tanner et al, 2008), participants had
laughter’ to punctuate their jokes, laugh two bowls of snacks in front of them (gold-
tracks induce more laughter from viewers fish crackers and animal crackers). A con-
(Bush et al, 1989). The cliché on how federate across the table also had these two
yawning is ‘contagious’ is actually true snack options. When the confederate ate
(Provine, 1986), and we wince when we more goldfish crackers, the subject tended
see others in pain (Bavelas et al, 1987). to eat more goldfish, and when the con-
Infants two to three weeks old imitate federate ate more animal crackers, the sub-
simple movements such as sticking out their ject consumed more animal crackers.
tongues and blinking their eyes (Meltzoff What’s more, the subjects indicated a higher

© 2011 Macmillan Publishers Ltd. 1350-23IX Journal of Brand Management Vol. 18, 7, 483–505 489
Martin and Morich

preference for the cracker choice they mim- either ‘politeness’ or ‘rudeness’, and were
icked, regardless of previous preferences. then told to go speak with another exper-
The study of mimicry indicates that there imenter in another room. Upon finding
is a basal human instinct to copy the the experimenter engaged in conversation
behavior of those around us. This imitation with another person, those primed with
occurs unconsciously and can even sway ‘rudeness’ were more likely to interrupt
our opinions and preferences toward other his conversation than those primed with
objects and people. Consumer research that ‘politeness’. In another study (Zemack-
does not account for mimicry is missing a Rugar et al, 2007), participants were primed
fundamental process that drives consumer with the emotions of ‘guilt’ and ‘sadness’
attitudes and behavior. to determine whether the emotional con-
cepts could influence shopping indulgence.
Despite feeling no affect on their moods,
Trait and stereotype activation participants primed with sadness words
Perception of others’ behavior often goes were more likely to indulge in a personal
beyond simple mimicry, activating traits item (such as a CD/DVD player) than
and stereotypes automatically. Referred those primed with guilty words (who
to by social psychologists as ‘priming’, the purchased more ‘responsible’ items, like
activation of these higher-level constructs can school supplies). In an attempt to impact
lead to subsequent behaviors (Dijksterhuis mental performance, Dijksterhuis and van
et al, 2005). Knippenberg (1998) primed some of their
The classic study of priming on behavior participants with the stereotypes of college
(Bargh et al, 1996) exposed some partici- professors (‘intelligent’ words). With the
pants to words related to older people, such concept of ‘intelligence’ subliminally
as gray, bingo or Florida. These prime words primed, participants tended to perform
were exposed subliminally, through the use better on a set of questions taken from
of a scrambled sentence language task. Trivial Pursuit, answering more questions
Upon completion of the task, the partici- correctly than those who had not been
pants were told the experiment was over primed. On the contrary, when the stere-
and instructed to exit the room and walk otype of soccer hooligans had been primed
to the elevator to leave the building. (‘low intelligence’), participants performed
Unknown to the participants, a confederate worse.
observed the participants and timed how Bargh et al’s experiments with elderly words
long it took them to leave the office and and Dijksterhuis and van Knippenberg’s con-
reach the elevator. The data showed that trast of professors and soccer hooligans
those primed with the words relating to show that an individual tends to assimilate
older people took longer to walk down the behavior traits of a different group
the hall than those who completed neutral when exposed to stereotypes of that group.
language tasks. The participants displayed We actually see the opposite effect when
behavior that incorporated the elderly an individual is exposed to the traits of
stereotype. another individual. In a recreation of the
Other priming examples show that this Bargh experiment by Dijksterhuis et al
subconscious activation of traits can have a (1998), individuals primed with a specific
wide influence on our behavior, emotion example of an elderly individual (in this
and mental performance. In another exper- case, the Dutch Queen Mother) walked
iment by Bargh et al (1996), participants faster than the control group. This behav-
were primed with words that described ioral contrast occurs because our brains

490 © 2011 Macmillan Publishers Ltd. 1350-23IX Journal of Brand Management Vol. 18, 7, 483–505
Unconscious mental processes in consumer choice

implicitly compare its traits with that of communicate to an audience. Consider

the primed example. We tend to naturally makeup commercials. Would a woman
contrast ourselves with individuals we see watching television have a different reac-
as different from us. tion to a Mabelline commercial featuring
The researchers took this finding one multiple ‘anonymous’ pretty people rather
step further to determine whether subjects than a specific celebrity example of beauty?
who identify themselves as part of a group Perhaps the ‘anonymous’ approach would
performed contrasting behavior when create more feelings of beauty, whereas
primed with qualities of an ‘opposite’ group comparison to the celebrity would create
(Spears et al, 2004). The researchers took a the opposite effect (‘I’m so ugly compared
group of Psychology majors and had them to her …’). Advertising and other mar-
take questionnaires that reinforced their keting methods can have powerful priming
membership with their ‘group’ (for example, effects, but little research has gone into how
‘Most of my courses are in the Psychology the visual stimuli and written claims sub-
Dept’.). They were then told that they liminally influence consumer behavior.
would be helping with a ‘creativity test’,
where the students had 7 min to color a
picture. They were also told that the Nonconscious goal pursuit
coloring exercise would need to be per- Priming of certain traits and stereotypes has
formed twice for accuracy, and that another provided numerous indications that the
‘unrelated’ piece of research from another manner in which a consumer performs a
experiment would occur during the two behavior can be affected at an unconscious
tests to give them a break (apparently, col- level. The third realm of automaticity
lege students will believe almost anything research, nonconscious goal pursuit, pro-
for course credit). The buffer experiment vides evidence that goals can also be primed;
was another scrambled sentence test. One that is, the entire path from goal activation
group of students was told fellow Psych and goal setting to goal completion occurs
majors composed the sentences, whereas without conscious introspection (Dijksterhuis
the other was told that the sentences came et al, 2005).
from Economics majors. Each sentence was The idea behind nonconscious goal
designed to prime the idea of neatness pursuit began with the observation that
(‘Margot sorts her old papers’). Once once a goal has been activated, such as
completed, the students took the second driving to work, the process proceeds auto-
coloring test. matically (Bargh, 1990). It was argued that,
What the researchers found is that behav- just like other mental constructs, goals
ioral contrast can occur at the group level. could be automatically activated by cues
The psych students who received the sen- from the environment. Chartrand and
tence test ‘designed by Economics majors’ Bargh (1996) tested this notion when they
were primed to perceive Economics majors attempted through unconscious means to
as neat. As a result, their second coloring replicate the results of a previous study on
tests were significantly messier than the conscious goal activation (Hamilton et al,
students who got a sentence test built by a 1980). This previous study found that
Psych major (measured by how much people process information about others
coloring occurs outside the lines). they meet depending on whether they are
Trait and stereotype priming has impli- given the goal to form an impression, or
cations for consumer research. Advertisers the goal to memorize the information.
often use imagery and written words to Those given the goal to form an impression

© 2011 Macmillan Publishers Ltd. 1350-23IX Journal of Brand Management Vol. 18, 7, 483–505 491
Martin and Morich

actually remember information about a is often associated with creativity and inno-
person better than those asked to memo- vation, that personality would subcon-
rize. Chartrand and Bargh also had par- sciously prime the goal to be more creative.
ticipants meet new people and measured Analysis found that even though none of
how well each participant remembered the participants had any idea they had been
information about these new acquaintances; primed with the Apple or IBM brand logos,
only their experiment contained an impor- those who had been primed with the Apple
tant difference: the goal of forming an logo were more creative. Apple-primed
impression and the goal of memorizing participants came up with more unusual use
information were presented subliminally, ideas and those ideas were independently
through priming. The results were the same judged to be more creative than those
as the previous study. The unconsciously primed with IBM. Brands have personalities,
primed goals had achieved the same effect and these personalities can have an uncon-
as the conscious ones. scious impact on consumer behavior.
Nonconscious goal pursuit has been fur- Behavior can be unconsciously influ-
ther explored in a number of experiments. enced through the perception of others’
Social goals, such as achievement and behavior. We unconsciously assimilate the
cooperation, can be activated unconsciously traits and stereotypes of others as we per-
(Bargh et al, 2001). Environments also form behaviors. Even our goals can become
automatically prime nonconscious goals. activated and pursued unconsciously. The
In one study, participants led to believe consumer behavior models that posit only
they would be visiting a library would conscious information processing and the
randomly begin whispering (Aarts and deliberate formation of attitudes, beliefs and
Dijksterhuis, 2003). Goals can be activated intentions lead to purchase decisions do not
by environmental cues outside conscious accommodate this reality.
awareness, and they can be pursued uncon-
sciously.
In a goal-priming experiment that is Habits: Behavior on autopilot
perhaps the most applicable to consumers, Some researchers treat habits and automa-
Fitzsimons et al (2008) set out to explore ticity as the same, but habits distinguish
what unconscious influence, if any, brand themselves as a specific type of noncon-
names could have on goal pursuit. Con- scious behavior, which are activated by
sumer researchers have found evidence that environmental cues and occur outside of
consumers instill brands with human-like goals and intentions. Habits form as the
qualities (Aaker, 1997), and that it has been brain learns through frequent repetitions to
theorized that these ‘brand personalities’ associate particular behaviors (for example,
can affect consumer behavior in the same buying a brand of cereal) with internal (for
way that the personality traits of other example, hunger) or external (for example,
people impact attitudes and goal pursuit. brand name or logo) cues within a partic-
The experimenters subliminally primed ular contextual situation (for example,
participants with either the Apple or IBM stocking up at the grocery store). In the
logos. Participants were then given a two- future, perception of the context will
part test that contained a mindless text directly activate the associated habitual
reading exercise and an ‘unusual uses’ test behavior in memory (Wood and Neal,
(‘how many ways can you use a paper 2009).
clip?’) that measured creativity. The team Habits have roots in the neuroscience of
hypothesized that because the Apple brand the mind. The brain relegates decisions to

492 © 2011 Macmillan Publishers Ltd. 1350-23IX Journal of Brand Management Vol. 18, 7, 483–505
Unconscious mental processes in consumer choice

the basal ganglia to free resources up for Automatic processes drive the bulk of
the conscious mind for more creative consumer behavior, and that the majority
purposes. Neurological research shows that, of these automatic processes are habits. The
as a behavior is repeated, goal-oriented next section proposes a new model of con-
structures in the brain have reduced activity sumer behavior that incorporates habitual
and systems linked to stimulus control and behavior and other automaticity to reflect
automatic responses increase in activity. the dynamics, and often unconsciousness,
The brain physically changes while inter- of consumer behavior.
preting the environment following habit
formation (Yin and Knowlton, 2006). TOWARD A NEW MODEL OF
Human brains shift control of human CONSUMER BEHAVIOR
behavior to environmental contexts. After
forming a habit, goals, intentions, attitudes Into the void
and beliefs have no role in behavioral As existing consumer behavior models are
execution. built on the foundation of a conscious agent
Neal et al (2009) demonstrate this in a making rational decisions (Part 1), and we
clever experiment involving moviegoers now understand this assumption is highly
and popcorn. Participants in the study rated flawed (Part 2), a new model of consumer
a series of movie trailers. They were also behavior is necessary. This section proposes
given a bag of popcorn; some of the pop- just such a model. The underlying frame-
corn was fresh, whereas other bags were work of this model is that of a dynamic
1 week old. Participants who rarely ate consumer with a rich history of experience
popcorn, predictably, liked the stale pop- who is utilizing conscious and unconscious
corn less and ate much less than those who mental processes to accomplish a wide range
had fresh popcorn. However, participants of goals.
who habitually ate popcorn at the movies Most market research focuses narrowly
were different. Although they expressed a to answer specific questions and to reduce
disliking for the stale popcorn, they still complexity that might confound the study.
consumed just as much popcorn as those Integrating findings across studies is difficult
with fresh bags. Liking and preference did because there lacks a mechanism to dynam-
not influence their consumption; rather, ically combine results. Consumer insight
the movie theater context triggered the organizations might hire an ethnographer
popcorn-eating behavior. to study product usage at home, as well as
Repetition is a central feature of sponsor research delving into the elasticity
consumer life. Consumers buy the same of product pricing, while simultaneously
brands across multiple shopping trips testing the emotional engagement for a
(Seetharaman, 2004), spend the same new product advertisement. Each study
amount of money with each visit to a retail generates significant data with potential for
store (Vogel et al, 2008) and eat similar illuminating discoveries; however, the find-
foods for each meal every day (Khare and ings must be considered in isolation because
Inman, 2006). Quinn and Wood (2005) there is not a single functional model of
showed that nearly 50 per cent of people’s consumer behavior that can tie these con-
behavior is repeated almost daily and cepts together.
usually in the exact same circumstances and Most prior research in consumer behavior
at the same time. And in most situations, has been compromised by incorrect assump-
they are thinking about something else at tions about the underpinnings of consumer
the time. behavior. For decades, companies have

© 2011 Macmillan Publishers Ltd. 1350-23IX Journal of Brand Management Vol. 18, 7, 483–505 493
Martin and Morich

relied on consumer insights generated from adding an unconscious element to existing

surveys, customer interviews and focus models is insufficient – consumer behavior
groups. Each of these techniques is inca- is not a rigid, linear process. The goal for
pable of revealing the motivations behind creating a new model of consumer behavior
behaviors that were driven by unconscious is to provide both academics and practi-
habits – consumers cannot consciously tioners with a model that both fits more
access the part of the brain that initiated closely to actual behavior and the automatic
the behavior (Beilock and Carr, 2001; processes that drive it. The model provides
Foerde et al, 2006). When a consumer is a practical method for advancing marketing
asked a question about the purchase or use theory and practice, while also providing
of a product, she assumes that a rational consumer researchers with an integrated,
explanation exists for their behavior and holistic view of the consumer.
proceeds to make one up on the spot
(Bem, 1972; Neal et al, 2009). This biased Level of automation
information process populates a company’s The central problem with early conceptu-
models, strategies and basic understanding alizations of consumer behavior is the pre-
of its customers and is often unquestioningly supposition of conscious thought preceding
the basis for new product development, action. Instead of positing the decisive
advertising campaigns and merchandising. ‘beginning of consumer behavior’ as a
Traditional marketing models miss the conscious evaluation of needs, the Martin-
dynamic, organic process of human Morich model begins with a new perspec-
behavior. Owing to the primacy and tive on how the consumer behaves ‘in the
potency of unconscious behavior, simply wild’ (Figure 2). To accurately evaluate

Figure 2: The Martin-Morich model of consumer behavior.

494 © 2011 Macmillan Publishers Ltd. 1350-23IX Journal of Brand Management Vol. 18, 7, 483–505
Unconscious mental processes in consumer choice

consumer behavior, we must first under- upon the lackluster performance of new
stand how consciously or unconsciously the product introductions, but failure persist-
consumer is interacting with the brand, ently hovers at around 80–85 per cent.
product, website or store – her level of New products that test well in market
automaticity. The marketer should assess research often wither and fail in the mar-
the consumer’s level of automation along ketplace (Cooper, 2001). A testing envi-
a continuum of consciousness to uncon- ronment places subjects in a novel situation,
sciousness that is broken into the categories which engages the conscious mind to make
of Autopilot, Pilot or Co-Pilot mode. ‘rational’ evaluations of the new product.
A consumer continuously operates in the However, when the consumer is back in
world with some degree of automaticity. her natural shopping environment, she
The more familiar the environment, the returns to autopilot and is likely to not even
more routine the behavior, the higher the notice the new product. Even if she does
level of automaticity (autopilot) the con- notice it, she will be unlikely to purchase
sumer uses to navigate the situation. In the new product unless her automatic
contrast, the more novel the setting or behavior path is disrupted. Similarly,
problem, the more the conscious mind product use or consumption behavior fol-
attends to the circumstances (pilot) (Ouellette lows the same dynamic process.
and Wood, 1998). The conscious mind
rarely, if ever, initiates behavior. Rather,
conscious awareness is dependent on the Pilot
unconscious mind’s ability to interpret and A consumer who is consciously attending
process its surroundings. to the purchase of a product or service is
in Pilot mode. This may involve weighing
costs and benefits and making comparisons
Autopilot with competing products, as well as com-
Autopilot mode represents habitual pur- paring purchase to non-purchase outcomes.
chase and usage behavior, and is the state Pilot mode is more likely to occur when a
of being that enables a person to complete consumer is in a novel purchase situation
tasks that are not linked to conscious intent, or if some element of the routine purchase
needs or goals. As the conscious mind can behavior has changed, such as price, fea-
only think of one thing at a time, it offloads tures or distribution channels, which acti-
as much as possible to the unconscious vates the consumer’s conscious awareness.
mind (Nilsen et al, 2008). Through repeat- In addition, purchases that involve high
edly solving problems in stable situations, risk or high expense will engage conscious
the unconscious mind can master a wide processing (Dijksterhuis et al, 2005).
range of complex behaviors (Bargh, 1989; Although most models of consumer
Ouellette and Wood, 1998). behavior assume the customer is in Pilot
Habit research from multiple disciplines mode at all times, fully conscious decision
reveals that most behavior involves uncon- making is a rare, and fleeting, experience.
scious responses to cues in the environ- When a consumer encounters a novel
ment, meaning the vast majority of time situation, the conscious brain becomes
consumer behavior falls into the autopilot active (Wood et al, 2005). Novelty relates
category. This defeats marketing efforts that to both the environment one is in and the
assume or require conscious recall or particular situation one is experiencing. A
processing of information. For example, novel environment, such as the first visit to
marketers have tried for years to improve a store, activates many conscious mental

© 2011 Macmillan Publishers Ltd. 1350-23IX Journal of Brand Management Vol. 18, 7, 483–505 495
Martin and Morich

processes, giving the consumer a strong such as buying a name brand when pur-
conscious engagement with her surround- chasing new technology.
ings. A novel situation, such as seeking Consumer behavior cannot be evaluated
out low-fat foods at the grocery store in without understanding where the consumer
reaction to a recent doctor visit, similarly is along the continuum of automaticity
engages the conscious mind and the con- during purchase or usage. Some marketers
sumer becomes aware of his behavior. assume that consumers were making rational
These instances of novel consumer experi- and conscious decisions, yet a large per-
ences fully engage the shopper with the centage of consumer behavior is occurring
setting and information around him as unconsciously. As a result, advertising,
he attempts to rationally decide on an pricing and, indeed, the entire concept of
outcome. ‘the marketing mix’ are often ineffectual.
However, even in novel situations and This does not imply that conscious
environments, just because the mind is processing is unimportant. On the contrary,
aware of what is going on does not neces- the model posits that there is an active
sarily imply control over its actions. interplay between conscious and uncon-
Behavior often leads, not follows, conscious scious processing. However, as the model
intent. For example, Americans almost uni- illustrates, the conscious consumer mind is
formly enter a store and go to the right, always working to automate its behaviors.
rather than left or straight ahead (Sorensen, Marketers benefit from respecting the large
2009). The conscious mind may believe and active role unconscious behavior plays
that the right-hand turn was made to head in every consumer action, and adjust their
for the fruits and vegetables, but the reality marketplace approaches accordingly.
is that the body was heading there anyway,
healthy diet or not. This section of the Context and cues
model illustrates the challenge – even when Familiarity drives automaticity. If the mind
‘thinking’ about a new product, what perceives an environment as familiar, the
consumers do is still largely a result of perception enables the unconscious to
unconscious mental processes. And most automate behavior. If the consumer per-
of the time customers are shopping, they ceives the environment as novel, the con-
are not ‘thinking’. scious mind actively engages to interpret
its surroundings and figure out what to do.
The human mind assesses familiarity and
Co-pilot automates behavior through the perception
In many familiar situations, consumers of context (Wood and Neal, 2009).
experience a relatively narrow range of Habits form when a behavior is repeated
choices that do not require a fully conscious and rewarded inside a stable context. By
evaluation, yet are too complicated to be frequently performing an action in a con-
relegated to automatic habitual choice. In stant setting, the unconscious mind learns
these cases, consumers are likely to use to associate that environment, and the var-
heuristics (simple rules) to partially auto- ious stimuli within it, with that particular
mate behavior (Shen and Wyer, 2007; Xu behavior and its outcomes (Ouellette and
and Wyer, 2008). For example, when a Wood, 1998). Once the behavior is
product is on sale, consumers may have a habitual, the mind no longer needs con-
heuristic that causes them to purchase mul- scious goals or intentions to launch the
tiple units. Co-pilot mode may also be behavior (Triandis, 1977; Verplanken et al,
activated in situations of mild complexity, 1994; Ouellette and Wood, 1998; Ferguson

496 © 2011 Macmillan Publishers Ltd. 1350-23IX Journal of Brand Management Vol. 18, 7, 483–505
Unconscious mental processes in consumer choice

and Bibby, 2002; Danner et al 2008; Ji and choices and establishing thresholds of
Wood, 2007). Unconscious recognition of awareness that determine what stimuli the
a context and contextual cues is enough to consumer perceives (Anderson, 2003;
initiate a habit (Wood and Neal, 2009). Danner et al, 2007; McCulloch et al, 2008).
However, contexts form actively, not In dressing for work, the jeans and running
passively, and humans are not automatons shoes get ignored – only the ‘work clothes’
blindly reacting to cues in the environment. are given consideration.
Consumers align their contexts with higher- Meta-contexts can be universal, cultural,
order goals, and internally generated con- segment-specific or individual constructs.
siderations can break the linkages between They are a critical component of habit
contexts and behavior (Aarts et al, 1998). formation because they help the uncon-
The model illustrates this dynamic by scious mind narrow down the thousands
separating context into three layers: the of cues in an environment to the ones rel-
meta-Context, the contextual event and evant to the situation at hand. A product,
the sub-context. brand or message that does not resonate
with the parameters established by a con-
sumer’s meta-context will be ignored as
Meta-context irrelevant.
The meta-context is an overarching, goal-
oriented framework that consumers use to
organize their worlds. For example, most Contextual event
consumers have a ‘Going to Work’ meta- A contextual event is a situation-specific
context. On a typical weekday morning, behavior (task) associated with a meta-
they engage in multiple tasks routinely: context. In most of the research on habit
waking to an alarm, showering, shaving, formation, the literature’s definition of
washing hair, drying hair, styling hair, context is equivalent to the Martin-Morich
putting on makeup and deodorant, choosing Model’s concept of the contextual event.
clothes, eating breakfast and driving or These contextual events are a framework
taking public transportation to work and for the brain to perform a habitual behavior
so on. Most days, each of these tasks within a context. The unconscious mind
is performed completely on autopilot assesses the physical environment, the time
(Verplanken et al, 2005). The meta-context of day, the day of the week, and all of
framework surrounding these tasks defines the accompanying stimuli surrounding
their parameters and thresholds and helps the consumer and is cued to launch one
dramatically reduce the number of con- or many habitual behaviors (Neal et al,
scious choices that have to be made. 2009).
A meta-context is a filter that shapes A contextual event is not a behavior
consumer perception. ‘Going to Work’ itself, but a marker for the brain to perform
defines the subset of a wardrobe that is an associated behavior. All the routine
acceptable for the workplace. Similarly, it tasks that occur within the ‘Going to
may outline a particular way hair is styled Work’ meta-context are contextual events.
and the foods prepared that are eaten for Standing in front of the bathroom sink
breakfast. These parameters, determined could launch a range of behaviors that
by corporate policy (dress code) and as part might include shaving, putting on makeup
of the logistics of getting to work (amount and brushing teeth. Opening the refriger-
of time available to prepare breakfast), make ator door will cue some consumers to reach
consumers more efficient by reducing for fruit and yogurt, whereas others will

© 2011 Macmillan Publishers Ltd. 1350-23IX Journal of Brand Management Vol. 18, 7, 483–505 497
Martin and Morich

pull out bacon and eggs. Sitting in the car typically lie below conscious awareness, but
will send the driver automatically along his can be elevated to conscious consideration
usual route to the office. The brain has an and interrupt habitual behavior (Macrae
innate ability to unconsciously recognize and Johnston, 1998).
contextual events and respond with the Typically, factors such as convenience,
associated habitual behaviors (Yin and economy, family, morals and health serve
Knowlton, 2006). as sub-context vectors. Each habitual
A habitual behavior cannot exist without behavior in a given context more or less
a contextual event. As a marker for a situ- aligns with a consumer’s sub-context
ation-specific behavior, the contextual requirements. For example, in the time-
event is one of the most important sections compressed contextual event of grabbing
of the model for marketers to grasp. Each breakfast before heading off to work, con-
contextual event represents potentially venience often trumps nutrition (a health
hundreds of brand choices – which tooth- sub-context). But if the health vector is
paste to brush with, which cereal to eat, elevated into a concern, say from a tight-
which radio station to listen to and so on. fitting pair of jeans or ten extra pounds
Once a consumer links a brand with a con- on the bathroom scale, then the consumer
textual event, the habitual use of that brand may consciously attend to her breakfast
can be very hard to disrupt, even if the choice and eschew the hi-carb bagel for a
brand is not viewed as superior. However, piece of fruit instead.
if a brand does not establish its connection An elevated sub-context vector may just
to a particular context or create a new temporarily impact behavior, or can induce
context for its purchase or use, it will not lasting change. Think of a sub-context
become habitual (Ouellette and Wood, vector as a tuning fork. A single hit will
1998). At best, the consumer will have emit a vibration for a short period of time,
to consciously decide to use it every and then go silent. The conscious reminder
time, a cognitively expensive and unlikely to make better breakfast choices will fade,
scenario. and behavior will return to the bagel, the
Marketers have long operated under the habitual choice. But if the vector is con-
simple illusion that the consumer views tinually struck, the disruption in habitual
brands in isolation, such as a painting behavior may be long enough to produce
hanging on an art gallery wall. The reality enough repetitions of alternative behavior
is a far messier organic process where and result in new habits being formed. The
products are integrated into behavior, economic recession that began in 2008 is
typically outside of conscious awareness. playing this scenario out right now. The
near-constant reminders of the economy
vector have brought many consumers’
Sub-context spending habits into conscious awareness
Just because behavior is largely unconscious for so long that the behavior of limiting
does not imply that consumer actions do discretionary spending and trading down to
not align with intentions and goals. Humans store brands has become habitual. These
have a highly evolved adaptive mechanism new habits will likely extend far beyond
that allows them to alter even the most the actual recession.
highly habitual behaviors if the mind Marketers need to understand their con-
perceives potential signs that a behavior sumer’s underlying sub-contexts and
may not align with internal requirements. actively monitor the marketplace for mes-
Sub-contexts are vectors of concern that saging that might resonate to elevate these

498 © 2011 Macmillan Publishers Ltd. 1350-23IX Journal of Brand Management Vol. 18, 7, 483–505
Unconscious mental processes in consumer choice

areas to conscious awareness. Then mar- technique relentlessly, putting brands in the
keters must work to align their brand with hands of beautiful models and celebrity
what is going on in the world that might endorsers (Gorn, 1982; Stuart et al, 1987).
be elevating behavior to conscious awareness. Consumers can learn cues through operant
The utility of viewing context in three conditioning where a consumer is actively
parts is that academics and marketers can working with a product to solve a problem
get a far better understanding of consumer or create a benefit (Nord and Peter,
behavior by understanding the conscious 1980).
and unconscious elements of that behavior. Cues are essential to habit formation, and
Without this level of understanding, it is critical to any successful marketing effort.
unlikely that companies will develop prod- When cues are managed well, they can lead
ucts with the correct attributes to lead to to nearly addictive responses, as with the
habitual use. RIM BlackBerry. The auditory or vibra-
tory sensation is so powerfully associated
with the receipt of an email that corporate
Cues users have the device in their hand before
Through repeated exposures, the uncon- they are consciously aware of the stimulus.
scious mind begins associating various However, marketers often neglect to
stimuli within a context with behaviors and take control of cues to activate behavior.
their outcomes. With repetition, the process A consumer shopping on autopilot is not
turns stimuli in the environment into cues consciously thinking about her need states
that automate behavior. Eventually, cues and the value offered by a particular product
trigger behavior within a context inde- choice, but automatically responding to the
pendent of conscious intentions and goals cues around her. Without associated cues,
(Wood and Neal, 2009). This creates sig- a marketer must actively sell their brand at
nificant cognitive efficiency, enabling the every purchase occasion.
conscious mind to contemplate novel In January of 2009, Tropicana orange
problems or attend to other matters (Nilsen juice launched a major package redesign,
et al, 2008). replacing the familiar straw in an orange
Any stimulus that occurs in concert with with a glass of orange juice that promi-
a contextual behavior can potentially nently displayed the words ‘100 per cent
become a cue. Cues can be internal or Juice’. Sales declined 20 per cent between
external. Internal cues can be moods, 1 January and 22 February, when the old
thoughts, feelings or state changes perceived packaging was reintroduced (Zmuda, 2009).
by the mind. External cues can be anything Disrupting the cues that consumers use to
perceived by the senses. The smell of automate behavior is fraught with peril.
popcorn can be a powerful cue for many
moviegoers, but a dark movie theater can Behavior, feedback and learning
also become a popcorn cue (Neal et al, Habits form through the repetition of
2009). Brand names, logos, packaging, behavior in a stable context (Ouellette and
jingles and slogans can become cues in the Wood, 1998). Throughout these repeti-
shopping environment (Warlop et al, 2005). tions, the mind is assessing the behavior and
Even a time of day, other people, or an its resulting outcomes. By gathering this
entire context could become a cue (Wood conscious- and unconscious-level feedback,
et al, 2005; Wood and Neal, 2009). the brain learns whether or not to perform
Cues can form through pairing, as in the behavior in the same context in the
classical conditioning. Advertisers use this future.

© 2011 Macmillan Publishers Ltd. 1350-23IX Journal of Brand Management Vol. 18, 7, 483–505 499
Martin and Morich

Behavior anything that comes afterward might be

Any action that a consumer takes in interpreted as feedback from that action.
response to a product or service, even inac- This feedback interpretation occurs at both
tion, amounts to behavior. Behaviors typi- the conscious and unconscious levels.
cally occur within a context and in response Immediate feedback effectively trains the
to internal or external cues: to purchase or unconscious mind, whereas the conscious
not to purchase; buy the usual brand or try mind can bridge the gap between a delayed
something new; stock up or hope the response and a behavior (Schultz, 2006).
product is on sale next time. Most of the However, the closer in time the feedback
time, consumers make these decisions is to the behavior, the more likely the con-
without any conscious consideration. By sumer will associate this as cause and
adulthood, most consumers have a vast effect.
storehouse of scripted behaviors for con- Feedback comes in three essential fla-
textualized situations. This repository vors: reinforcing, punishing or neutral.
allows consumers to move quickly through Reinforcement is feedback that makes a
a grocery or department store, as well as behavior more likely to occur in the future.
the kitchen and the pantry. Punishment is feedback that makes a
Behavior can be simple or inordinately behavior less likely to occur. Neutral feed-
complex. Although it is hard to compre- back provides no information that will
hend, the vast majority of behavior is initi- affect the behavior, either because the
ated by the unconscious mind. The response was not strong enough to alter
conscious mind might be aware a choice future likelihood, or the brain ignored the
was made, but in the words of Dijksterhuis response (Pryor, 1984).
et al (2005) ‘These choices were introspec- Reinforcement and punishment are
tively blank’. This perspective means that often regarded in absolute terms: reinforce-
no conscious thought processes occur that ment is a reward with sensory appeal, for
a consumer can review to explain why a example, a cookie, and a punishment is an
choice was made. uncomfortable or painful experience. But
However, just because no conscious reinforcement and punishment are not
thought process is available does not mean always so obvious – the terms only refer to
the behavior is not fueled by intention. Every the effect on future behavior when the
behavior begins as a choice fueled by reason. feedback is received. Both can be positive
The conscious brain is highly involved in or negative. The annoying buzzer on an
early behavioral learning, making decisions, alarm clock is a negative reinforcer. The
executing actions and assessing the results. irritating sound stops when a sleeper per-
Over time, this activity dies down, and forms the behavior of hitting the ‘off’ or
unconscious habits take over (Thorn et al, ‘snooze’ button. A shocking cell phone bill
2010). Habits are simply shortcuts developed is a positive punishment. Its introduction
by the mind from past successful behavior. decreases a customer’s propensity to use as
The feedback process helps the brain deter- many minutes in the future.
mine which behaviors are successful. Marketers used to think that a measure
of satisfaction would be an indicator of
future use, but that metric does a poor job
Feedback of predicting future purchase (Neal, 1999).
Feedback is the mind’s perceived conse- Instead of striving for customer satisfaction,
quence of a behavior. After a consumer marketers should strive for customer
makes a purchase or uses a product, reinforcement. By reinforcing consumer

500 © 2011 Macmillan Publishers Ltd. 1350-23IX Journal of Brand Management Vol. 18, 7, 483–505
Unconscious mental processes in consumer choice

behavior, marketers increase the chances of critical for storing and recalling memories,
repetition and, in turn, the chances of habit forever altering the belief that rational deci-
formation around their brand. sions devoid of emotional considerations
are ‘better’. Indeed, researchers now under-
stand that decision making requires emo-
Learning tions.
The brain learns from feedback generated Emotion is a catalyst. When behavioral
by a behavior, and that learning impacts feedback is paired with an emotion, the
future performance of that behavior. A consumer is more likely to learn from that
feedback response interpreted by the brain behavior (Baumeister et al, 2007). In the
can either strengthen habitual behavior or model, emotion amplifies the effects of
disrupt it. A reinforcing experience with a reinforcement and punishment. With the
brand makes repurchase more likely, proper use of emotion, marketers can
whereas a punishing experience makes encourage faster learning, more repetition
future purchase less likely (Nevin et al, and habit formation (see Innerscope
1987). Reinforcement and punishment also Research, 2010). More importantly, if mar-
impact how conscious the consumer will keting communications does not evoke an
be the next time she performs a behavior appropriate emotional response, it is less
in a context. For non-habitual behaviors, a likely the message will be attended to,
reinforcing round of feedback will strengthen stored in memory or recalled.
context and cue association and increase the However, the role of emotion is not
level of automation. Punishing feedback confined to the feedback loops that modu-
disrupts automation and re-elevates behavior late the Level of Automaticity. Instead,
to conscious scrutiny. emotion is posited to exert influence
For already habitual behaviors, only throughout every level of the model. Emo-
intermittent reinforcement at moderate tions affect our behavior, what cues we
levels is required to maintain the behavior. attend to and ignore, what we choose to
In fact, constant reinforcement or abnor- remember, and what we choose to recall.
mally large rewards can be a disruption
(Pryor, 1984). Constant reinforcement cre- Moving forward
ates a tit-for-tat scenario where the mind The need for a new model of consumer
is consciously seeking an outcome. has been evident for a while, but ironically
Abnormal rewards engage the conscious the feedback mechanisms that exist for aca-
mind and focus the brain on the behavior, demics and practitioners has made it diffi-
and future reinforcement that does not cult for a coherent new model to emerge.
match the ‘jackpot’ previously received Academic publications have to be narrowly
could be seen as a punishment (Dickinson focused for substantive contributions to
et al, 1983). Marketers should be aware that advance our understanding of specific phe-
learning for non-habitual customers differs nomena. By referencing prior referred arti-
from that of habitual customers. A strategy cles to assure a continuous refinement of
that leads to automation in one group may our understanding of any specific topic,
be disrupting the other. most academics are forced to narrow their
vision, making it difficult to feel sufficiently
Emotion well versed across marketing disciplines to
A critical component to learning, as well propose anything as wide reaching as a
as to recall, is the role of emotion. Research new, integrated model of marketing. Prac-
from several disciplines reveals emotion as titioners are similarly narrow in their focus

© 2011 Macmillan Publishers Ltd. 1350-23IX Journal of Brand Management Vol. 18, 7, 483–505 501
Martin and Morich

around their own product category, brand Occurs: Focusing on Behavior in Social Psychological
Theory and Research. New York: Oxford University
or specialty. In addition, the rich mix of Press.
interdisciplinary literature that undergirds Bargh, J.A. (1989) Conditional automaticity: Varieties
this type of model would prove daunting of automatic influence in social perception and
cognition. In: J.S. Uleman and J.A. Bargh (eds.)
for a professional with full-time responsi- Unintended Thought. New York: Guilford Press,
bilities. pp. 4–51.
This model may enable practitioners and Bargh, J.A. (1990) Auto-motives: Preconscious deter-
academics to approach the complex and minants of social interaction. In: E. Higgins and
R.M. Sorrentino (eds.) Handbook of Motivation and
ever-changing world of consumer more Cognition: Foundations of Social Behavior, Vol. 2. New
effectively and efficiently by explicitly York, NY: Guilford Press, pp. 93–130.
undertaking to understand the role of the Bargh, J.A. (2002) Losing consciousness: Automatic influ-
ences on consumer judgment, behavior, and moti-
unconscious in any behavior of interest. vation. Journal of Consumer Research 29(2): 280–285.
Simultaneously, we hope that the model Bargh, J.A. and Chartrand, T.L. (1999) The unbearable
will help researchers use qualitative methods automaticity of being. American Psychologist 54(7):
462–479.
in confirmatory, as well as exploratory, Bargh, J.A., Chen, M. and Burrows, L. (1996) The
ways. automaticity of social behavior: Direct effects of trait
concept and stereotype activation on action. Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology 71: 230–244.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Bargh, J.A., Gollwitzer, P.M., Lee-Chai, A., Barndollar,
The authors acknowledge and are grateful K. and Trotschel, R. (2001) The automated will:
for the cooperation and encouragement of Nonconscious activation and pursuit of behavioral
goals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 81:
clients including Procter & Gamble and 1014–1027.
Campbell Soup in the development of this Barry, T. (1987) The development of the hierarchy of
article and accompanying model. The effects: A historical perspective. Current Issues and
Research in Advertising 10: 251–295.
authors alone are responsible for all limita- Baumeister, R., Vohs, K., DeWall, N. and Zhang, L.
tions and errors that may relate to the study (2007) How emotion shapes behavior: Feedback,
and the article. anticipation, and reflection, rather than direct cau-
sation. Personality and Social Psychology Review 11:
167–203.
REFERENCES Bavelas, J.B., Black, A., Lemery, C.R. and Mullett, J.
Aaker, J.L. (1997) Dimensions of brand personality. (1987) Motor mimicry as primitive empathy.
Journal of Marketing Research 34: 347–356. In: N. Eisenberg and J. Strayer (eds.) Empathy
Aarts, H. and Dijksterhuis, A. (2003) The silence of and its Development. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge
the library: Environment, situational norm, and University Press, pp. 317–338.
social behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psy- Beilock, S.L. and Carr, T.H. (2001) On the fragility
chology 84: 18–28. of skilled performance: What governs choking
Aarts, H., Verplanken, B. and van Knippenberg, A. under pressure? Journal of Experimental Psychology:
(1998) Repeated decision making or a matter of General 130: 701–725.
habit? Journal of Applied Social Psychology 28(15): Bem, D.J. (1972) Self-perception theory. In:
1355–1374. L. Berkowitz (ed.) Advances in Experimental Social
Anderson, M.C. (2003) Rethinking interference theory: Psychology, Vol. 6. New York: Academic Press,
Executive control and the mechanisms of forget- pp. 1–62.
ting. Journal of Memory and Language 49: 415–445. Bush, L.K., Barr, C.L., McHugo, G.J. and Lanzetta, J.T.
Ariely, D. (2008) Predictably Irrational: The Hidden Forces (1989) The effects of facial control and facial mim-
That Shape Our Decisions. New York, NY: Harper icry on subjective reactions to comedy routines.
Collins. Motivation and Emotion 13: 31–52.
Bargh, J. (1994) The four horsemen of automaticity: Chaiken, S. (1980) Heuristic versus systematic informa-
Awareness, intention, efficiency, and control in tion processing and the use of source versus message
social cognition. In: R.S. Wyer Jr and T.K. Srull cues in Persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social
(eds.) The Handbook of Social Cognition, Vol. 2. Psychology 39: 752–766.
Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp. 1–40. Chartered Institute of Marketing. (2010) Definition of
Bargh, J. and Morsella, E. (2009) Unconscious behav- marketing. 8 December 2010, http://www.cim.co
ioral guidance systems. In: C. Agnew, D. Carlston, .uk/resources/understandingmarket/definitionmkting
W. Graziano and J. Kelly (eds.) Then a Miracle .aspx.

502 © 2011 Macmillan Publishers Ltd. 1350-23IX Journal of Brand Management Vol. 18, 7, 483–505
Unconscious mental processes in consumer choice

Chartrand, T.L. (2005) The role of conscious awareness Dijksterhuis, A. and van Knippenberg, A. (1998) The
in consumer behavior. Journal of Consumer Psychology relation between perception and behavior, or how
15(3): 203–210. to win a game of trivial pursuit. Journal of Personality
Chartrand, T.L. and Bargh, J.A. (1996) Automatic acti- and Social Psychology 74(4): 865–877.
vation of impression formation and memorization Fadiga, L., Fogassi, L., Pavesi, G. and Rizzolatti, G.
goals: Nonconscious goal priming reproduces (1995) Motor facilitation during action observation:
effects of explicit task instructions. Journal of Person- A magnetic stimulation study. Journal of Neurophys-
ality and Social Psychology 71: 464–478. iology 73: 2608–2611.
Chartrand, T.L. and Bargh, J.A. (1999) The Chame- Ferguson, E. and Bibby, P.A. (2002) Predicting future
leon effect: The perception-behavior link and social blood donor returns: Past behavior, intentions, and
interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology observer effects. Health Psychology 21: 513–518.
76(6): 893–910. Fitzsimons, G.M., Chartrand, T.L. and Fitzsimons, G.J.
Chartrand, T.L., Maddux, W.W. and Lakin, J.L. (2005) (2008) Automatic effects of brand exposure on
Beyond the perception-behavior link: The ubiqui- motivated behavior: How apple makes you ‘think
tous utility and motivational moderators of non- different’. Journal of Consumer Research 35: 21–35.
conscious mimicry. In: R. Hassin, J.S. Uleman and Foerde, L., Knowlton, B.J. and Poldrack, R.A. (2006)
J.A. Bargh (eds.) The New Unconscious. New York: Modulation of competing memory systems by dis-
Oxford University Press, pp. 334–361. traction. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Cooper, R. (2001) Winning at New Products. 103: 11778–11783.
Cambridge, MA: Basic Books. Food Marketing Institute. (2008) Supermarket facts:
Crick, F. and Koch, C. (1998) Consciousness and Industry overview. 24 July 2010, http://www.fmi
Neuroscience. Cerebral Cortex 8(2): 97–107. .org/facts_figs/?fuseaction=superfact.
Danner, U.N., Aarts, H. and de Vries, N.K. (2007) Fornell, C. (1996) The American Customer Satisfaction
Habit formation and multiple means to goal attain- Index [ACSI]: Nature, purpose, and findings.
ment: Repeated retrieval of target means causes Journal of Marketing 60(4): 7–18.
inhibited access to competitors. Personality and Social Fornell, C. (2007) The Satisfied Customer: Winners and
Psychology Bulletin 33: 1367–1379. Losers in the Battle for Buyer Preference. New York,
Danner, U.N., Aarts, H. and de Vries, N.K. (2008) NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
Habit vs. intention the prediction of future behavior: Gleick, J. (1987) Chaos: Making a New Science. New
The role of frequency, context stability and mental York, NY: Viking Press.
accessibility of past behavior. British Journal of Social Gorn, G. (1982) The effect of music in advertising on
Psychology 47: 245–265. choice behavior: A classical conditioning approach.
Decety, J. and Grezes, J. (1999) Neural mechanisms Journal of Marketing 46: 94–101.
subserving the perception of human actions. Trends Hamilton, D.L., Katz, L.B. and Leirer, V.O. (1980)
in Cognitive Sciences 3: 172–178. Organizational processes in impression formation.
Dennett, D. (1991) Consciousness Explained. Boston, In: R. Hastie, T.M. Ostrom, E.B. Ebbesen, R.S. Wyer,
MA: Back Bay Books. Jr., D.L. Hamilton and D.E. Cariston (eds.) Person
Dickinson, A., Nicholas, D.J. and Adams, C.D. (1983) Memory: The Cognitive Basis of Social Perception. Hillsdale,
The effect of the instrumental training contingency NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp. 121–153.
on susceptibility to reinforce devaluation. Quarterly Howard, J. and Sheth, J. (1969) The Theory of Buyer
Journal of Experimental Psychology 35: 35–51. Behavior. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Dijksterhuis, A. and Bargh, J.A. (2001) The percep- Iacoboni, M., Woods, R.P., Brass, M., Bekkering, H.,
tion-behavior expressway: The automatic effects of Mazziotta, J.C. and Rizzolatti, G. (1999) Cortical
social perception on social behavior. In: M.P. Zanna mechanisms of human imitation. Science 286:
(ed.) Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 2526–2528.
Vol. 33. San Diego, CA: Academic, pp. 1–40. Ji, M.F. and Wood, W. (2007) Purchase and consump-
Dijksterhuis, A., Chartrand, T.L. and Aarts, H. (forth- tion habits: Not necessarily what you intend. Journal
coming) Automatic behavior. In: J.A. Bargh (ed.) of Consumer Psychology 17: 261–276.
Automatic Processes in Social Thinking and Behavior. Johnston, L. (2002) Behavioral mimicry and stigmatiza-
Philadelphia, PA: Psychology Press, in press. tion. Social Cognition 20(1): 18–35.
Dijksterhuis, A. and Nordgren, L.F. (2006) A theory Khare, A. and Inman, J.J. (2006) Habitual behavior in
of unconscious thought. Perspectives on Psychological American eating patterns: The role of meal occa-
Science 1(2): 95–109. sions. Journal of Consumer Research 32: 567–575.
Dijksterhuis, A., Smith, P., van Baaren, R. and Lakin, J.L., Jeffries, V.E., Cheng, C.M. and Chartrand,
Wigboldus, D. (2005) The unconscious consumer: T.L. (2003) The Chameleon effect as social glue:
Effects of environment on consumer behavior. Evidence for the evolutionary signicance of non-
Journal of Consumer Psychology 15(3): 193–202. conscious mimicry. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior
Dijksterhuis, A. et al (1998) Seeing one thing and 27(3): 145–162.
doing another: Contrast effects in automatic Lamb, C.W., Hair, J.F. and McDaniel, C.D. (2010)
behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology MKTG 3.0. Mason, OH: South-Western Cengage
75: 862–871. Learning.

© 2011 Macmillan Publishers Ltd. 1350-23IX Journal of Brand Management Vol. 18, 7, 483–505 503
Martin and Morich

LeDoux, J. (1996) The Emotional Brain: The Mysterious Quinn, J.M. and Wood, W. (2005) Habits across the
Underpinnings of Emotional Life. New York, NY: lifespan. Unpublished Manuscript, Duke University.
Simon & Schuster. Schiffman, L.G. and Kanuk, L.L. (2009) Consumer
Lorenz, E.N. (1993) The Essence of Chaos. Seattle, WA: Behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
University of Washington Press. Schultz, W. (2006) Behavioral theories and the neuro-
Macrae, C.N. and Johnston, L. (1998) Help, I need physiology of reward. Annual Review of Psychology
somebody: Automatic action and inaction. Social 57: 87–115.
Cognition 16: 400–417. Seetharaman, P.B. (2004) Modeling multiple sources of
Martin, N. (2007) Habit: The 95% of Behavior Marketers state dependence in random utility models: A distri-
Ignore. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Financial Times buted lag approach. Marketing Science 23: 263–271.
Press. Shen, H. and Wyer, R.S. (2007) Procedural priming
McCulloch, K.C., Aarts, H., Fujita, K. and Bargh, J.A. and consumer judgments: Effects on the impact of
(2008) Inhibition in goal systems: A retrieval- positively and negatively valenced information.
induced forgetting account. Journal of Experimental Journal of Consumer Research 34: 727–737.
Social Psychology 44: 614–623. Singer, N. (2010) Making Ads that whisper to the brain.
Meltzoff, A.N. and Moore, M.K. (1977) Imitation of New York Times, November 2010. 1 December
facial and manual gestures by human neonates. 2010, http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/14/
Science 198: 75–78. business/14stream.html.
Meltzoff, A.N. and Moore, M.K. (1983) Newborn Sorensen, H. (2009) Inside the Mind of the Shopper.
infants imitate adult facial gestures. Child Develop- Upper Saddle River, NJ: Wharton School Pub-
ment 54: 702–709. lishing, p. 76.
Neal, D.T., Wood, W., Lally, P. and Wu, M. (2009) Spears, R., Gordijn, E., Dijksterhuis, A. and Stapel,
Do habits depend on goals? Perceived versus actual D.A. (2004) Reaction in action: Intergroup contrast
role of goals in habit performance. Manuscript in automatic behavior. Personality and Social Psy-
under Review, University of Southern California. chology Bulletin 30(5): 605–616.
Neal, W. (1999) Satisfaction is nice, but value drives Steen, R.G. (2007) The Evolving Brain: The Known and
loyalty. Marketing Research, A Magazine of Manage- the Unknown. Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books.
ment and Applications 11(1): 21–23. Stuart, E., Shimp, T. and Engle, R. (1987) Classical
Nevin, J., Smith, L. and Roberts, J. (1987) Does con- conditioning of consumer attitudes: Four experi-
tingent reinforcement strengthen operant behavior? ments in an advertising context. Journal of Consumer
Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior 48(1): Research 14: 334–349.
17–33. Tanner, R.J., Ferraro, R., Chartrand, T.L., Bettman, J.R.
Nilsen, P., Bourne, M. and Verplanken, B. (2008) and van Baaren, R. (2008) Of chameleons and
Accounting for the role of habit in behavioural consumption: The impact of mimicry on choice
strategies for injury prevention. International Journal and preferences. Journal of Consumer Research 34:
of Injury Control and Safety Promotion 15(1): 33–40. 754–766.
Nord, W.R. and Peter, J.P. (1980) A behavior modi- Thorn, C., Atallah, H., Howe, M. and Graybiel, A.
fication perspective on marketing. Journal of Mar- (2010) Differential dynamics of activity changes in
keting 44: 36–47. Dorsolateral and Dorsomedial Striatal loops during
O’Toole, R. and Dubin, R. (1968) Baby feeding and learning. Neuron 66(5): 781–795.
body sway: An experiment in George Herbert Triandis, H.C. (1977) Interpersonal Behavior. Monterey,
Mead’s ‘Taking the Role of the Other.’ Journal of CA: Brooks/Cole.
Personality and Social Psychology 10: 59–65. van Baaren, R.B., Holland, R.W., Kawakami, K. and
Ouellette, J. and Wood, W. (1998) Habit and intention van Knippenberg, A. (2003) Mimicry for money:
in everyday life: The multiple processes by which Behavioral consequences of imitation. Journal of
past behavior predicts future behavior. Psychological Experimental Psychology 39(4): 393–398.
Bulletin 124(1): 54–74. Verplanken, B., Aarts, H., van Knippenberg, A. and
Packard, V. (1957) The Hidden Persuaders. New York: van Knippenberg, C. (1994) Antecedents of travel
David McKay. mode choice. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 24:
Persky, J. (1995) Retrospectives – The ethology of 285–300.
Homo Economicus. The Journal of Economic Perspectives Verplanken, B., Myrbakk, V. and Rudi, E. (2005)
9(2): 221–231. The measurement of habit. In: T. Betsch and S.
Petty, R.E., Cacioppo, J.T. and Schumann, D. (1983) Haberstroh (eds.) The Routines of Decision Making.
Central and peripheral routes to advertising effec- Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, pp. 231–247.
tiveness: The moderating role of involvement. Vogel, V., Evanschitzky, H. and Ramaseshan, B. (2008)
Journal of Consumer Research 10: 135–146. Customer equity drivers and future sales. Journal of
Provine, R.R. (1986) Yawning as a stereotyped action Marketing 72: 98–108.
pattern and releasing stimulus. Ethology 72: 109–122. Warlop, L., Ratneshwar, S. and Van Osselar, S. (2005)
Pryor, K. (1984) Don’t Shoot the Dog! The New Art of Distinctive brand cues and memory for product
Teaching and Training. New York, NY: Bantam consumption experiences. International Journal of
Books. Research in Marketing 22: 27–44.

504 © 2011 Macmillan Publishers Ltd. 1350-23IX Journal of Brand Management Vol. 18, 7, 483–505
Unconscious mental processes in consumer choice

Wood, W. and Neal, D.T. (2009) The habitual con- Yin, H.Y. and Knowlton, B.J. (2006) The role of the
sumer. Journal of Consumer Psychology 19: 579–592. basal ganglia in habit formation. Nature Reviews
Wood, W., Tam, L. and Guerrero Witt, M. (2005) Neuroscience 7: 464–476.
Changing circumstances, disrupting habits. Journal Young, R.D. and Frye, M. (1966) Some are laughing;
of Personality and Social Psychology 88: 918–933. Some are not-why? Psychological Reports 18: 747–752.
Woodruff-Pak, D. and Steinmetz, J. (2000) Past, Zemack-Rugar, Y., Bettman, J.R. and Fitzsimons, G.J.
present, and future of human eyeblink classical con- (2007) The effects of nonconsciously priming
ditioning. In: D. Woodruff-Pak and J. Steinmetz emotion concepts on behavior. Journal of Personality
(eds.) Eyeblink Classical Conditioning. Norwell, MA: and Social Psychology 93(6): 927–939.
Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 1–18. Zmuda, N. (2009) Tropicana line’s sales plunge 20%
Xu, J.A. and Wyer, R.S. (2008) The effect of mindsets post-rebranding. Advertising Age, April 2009. 16
on consumer decision strategies. Journal of Consumer December 2009, http://adage.com/article?article_
Research 35: 556–566. id=135735.

© 2011 Macmillan Publishers Ltd. 1350-23IX Journal of Brand Management Vol. 18, 7, 483–505 505
Copyright of Journal of Brand Management is the property of Palgrave Macmillan Ltd. and its content may not
be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written
permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.