Should advertisers probe human minds as a means of boosting product sales? In a recent article in the online version of The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, David Wahlberg describes a new use for an emerging technology that has some people scratching their heads.[1] Using sophisticated MRI scanners, doctors at Emory University in Atlanta, Georgia are studying changes in brain activity that occur as people process images. Instead of striving for the laudable goal of understanding mental illness, they are seeking to determine what advertising images will promote higher sales of soft drinks, food, and automobiles. Some accuse these researchers of searching for the "buy button" in the brain and decry the realization of such pursuit as an abuse of medical technology--a form of "Orwellian" mind control--and note that in the recent science fiction movie Minority Report just such mind-reading was employed to control society.
Basically, the "neuromarketing" development on which Wahlberg reports can be described as follows: Subjects were shown visual images while their brains were being viewed with powerful MRI scanners and other imaging modalities. When the brain's medial prefrontal cortex lit up, indicating increased neural activity, the advertisers knew that the particular image displayed was a "winner" since this area of the brain reportedly represents "an area associated with preference, or sense of self." Product-associated images that are processed in this area are believed to be more likely to prompt purchases by consumers; thus, if advertisers can discern which product images cause a response in the medial prefrontal cortex, they should be able to bolster sales. Is this a manipulative, underhanded way to sell unneeded products to unsuspecting buyers? Or conversely, is it just a new, more scientific form of consumer interest research?
As Christians, we are called to be "wise as serpents and innocent as doves." As leaders in Christian bioethics, we have a responsibility to examine new applications of biomedical science to determine if our fellow believers, and society at large, are at risk of immediate or eventual harm. We do indeed have a protective role to fill. On the other hand, if new technologies offer great potential for helping humankind, we have a responsibility to help promote these new instruments for good. So, how should we feel about the latest neuromarketing advance? I think that we should be careful not to "cry wolf", but to instead keep a vigilant eye on these types of developments. In support of this, I offer the following:
Whenever new technologies emerge, we need to ask ourselves several questions. Does Scripture specifically address the technology itself or its underlying assumptions? If so, how? Where might the underlying science lead us? What good or evil may result? If a technique has the potential to harm God's creation, we must be watchful and wary. Alternatively, if there is potential promise of curing illness, assuaging pain, or delaying physical and/or mental decline within morally appropriate bounds, Christians should be supportive of further exploration. We must remain wise, closely watching forthcoming developments, but we should also be eager to help the hurting in morally legitimate ways.
That is how I view cognitive neuroscience—despite some of its commercial overtones.
[1] Wahlberg, David. "Advertisers Probe Brains, Raise Fears." The Atlanta Journal-Constitution. 2 February 2004. Available online at: http://www.ajc.com/business/content/business/0204a/01brain.html