Anda di halaman 1dari 3

Source Address: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?

id=brain-scans-predictpop-hits

Brain Scans Predict Pop Hits


Scientists monitor the brains of teens listening to songs and find the breakout hits tend to share certain neural signatures By Jason Castro | Tuesday, June 21, 2011 A few years ago, scientists one upped the Pepsi challenge. Unlike the original taste test, there were no camera crews or looks of staged surprise from loyalists of the other leading cola. Instead, volunteers rested inside an MRI scanner and tasted sips of Coke and Pepsi delivered through plastic tubes. Some trials involved rating beverage preference by taste alone. On other trials, the brand labels were also provided. To reveal the effect of branding on preference, some of the cola samples were intentionally mislabeled. The verdict? For most people, Pepsi labeled as Coke tastes better than Pepsi labeled as Pepsi. Evidently, advertising works, and as this experiment went on to further suggest, you can in some sense see a brand at work in the brain as it alters or supplements sensory processing. While fascinating, these kinds of data probably arent exciting to someone peddling a second-rate product. What good is seeing the neural correlate of your lousy brand, especially if youve already invested a lot in it? Naturally, what marketers would really want to do is run this process in reverse. That is, watch a brain respond to something yet untested, and predict its future success. Is there some kind of neural signature that indicates what will ultimately become popular and obsessed over, and what will flop? For now, no. However, a recent study by a pair of scientists shows that the idea isnt entirely implausible. Working from the departments of Economics and Neuropolicy at Emory University, Gregory Berns and Sara Moore found a surprising, if modest, correlation between brain activity while experiencing a new product and that products cultural popularity years later. Instead of studying soft drinks, Berns and Moore studied music preferences in adolescents. In 2006, they placed 32 children, aged 12 to 18, in an MRI scanner and had them listen to a wide variety of short song clips downloaded from MySpace.com. The scientists took scans of song-related activity in the childrens brains, and had the children report how likable each song was. After identifying brain areas whose activity was correlated with song likability, the scientists patiently sat on the data for about 3 years. During that time, the songs did what songs will do. A tiny percentage became extremely popular, a handful more became somewhat popular, and the overwhelming majority went nowhere. After tallying the sales information for each song, the scientists

essentially took a shot in the dark. They re-examined brain areas associated with song likability years ago, and asked if activity in those areas predicted a songs eventual success. For one area -- the nucleus accumbens - the answer was yes. Though it certainly didnt distinguish between hits and duds with dead-on accuracy, more activity in the accumbens was loosely predictive of higher sales. This study wasnt designed to test any specific idea about how the nucleus accumbens might do this. However, a good deal of other work has implicated this structure in reward processing and the subjective experience of pleasure, including that derived from music. The nucleus accumbens is one of the key subcortical structures of the brains mesolimbic pathway, a major subsystem bearing the neurotransmitter dopamine. Given the rich body of work linking dopamine to reward processing and valuation, its not surprising to see the nucleus accumbens implicated in the present study. Its important to be skeptical of attempts to simplify these kinds of findings as evidence for the brains buy button, or approval meter. Dopaminergic brain systems evolved to help their owners anticipate, forage, and act in the face of uncertainty, not predict trends in teenybopper stardom. Still, this study is among the most compelling in the nascent field of neuromarketing. It also helps to address critics of one of the fields early eyebrow raising pledges: that a consumers brain might provide better information about future purchases than the consumer. Similar to what others have seen, the authors of the teen song study found that experimental subjects were not skilled at predicting which songs would go on to become popular. This leads to something of a puzzle. How can a noisy, indirect, and heavily processed signal from the brain tell you more than asking someone hey, do you like that song? The reasons are unclear, but there are many interesting possibilities. Of course, theres always a chance this is due to some kind of methodological shortcoming. Maybe the questionnaires on song likability were poorly worded, or otherwise insufficient to elicit good guesses about a songs future popularity. Another possibility is that were a bit dishonest with ourselves. When asked which songs we most like, we might bow to perceived expectations, for example, downplaying our embarrassing inner rapture over Justin Bieber, or overstating our enjoyment of Miles Davis. Alternatively, the problem may not be willful dishonesty, but rather simple ignorance about what goes on in our brains. There could just be a complex array of so-called metacognitive processes intervening between the raw, visceral assessment of a song and our report of whether we like it. Enjoying a song in the moment -- which the study examined may be relatively simple but hidden to self interrogation. By contrast, making a case, even implicitly, that you like or dislike a song probably makes additional demands on cognitive systems for memory (does this sound like other things I like?)

and forecasting (is this a cool, potentially popular riff, or just weird?). For someone in the business of predicting a hit, all of this thinking about liking may just be noise. Which raises yet another, admittedly speculative, possibility. Perhaps songs or other pop culture ideas dont necessarily become popular because theyre likable by some common, aesthetic criteria that can be easily articulated. It may be that what was observed in the brain scans collected by Bern and Moore wasnt so much a correlate of pleasure, or intrigue, but something more like catchiness. If thats the case, we may have been given a glimpse of new ideas and memes, just starting to take hold in the brain.