بررسی تاثیر نحوه تفکر بر توجه دیداری افراد در انتخاب کاندیداها: مطالعه آزمایشگاهی با استفاده از ردیاب چشم

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی دکتری مدیریت بازرگانی - بازاریابی دانشکده مدیریت، پردیس کیش دانشگاه تهران، کیش، ایران

2 استادیار، گروه مدیریت بازرگانی، دانشکده مدیریت، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران

چکیده

استفاده از ابزارهای بازاریابی مدرن، همچون بازاریابی عصبی در تحقیقات اخیر گسترش یافته است و باتوجه به سرمایه‌گذاری‌های متعدد در استفاده از این ابزارها در انتخابات سیاسی کشورهای توسعه‌یافته، این ابزار می‌تواند نقش مهمی را در شناخت و بررسی ترجیحات رای‌دهندگان ایفا کند. همچنین، بررسی نحوه تفکر افراد می‌تواند به درک و پیش‌بینی بهتر ترجیحات، تصمیمات و رفتار رای‌دهندگان منجر شود. پژوهش حاضر با استفاده از ابزار ردیابی چشم، به‌دنبال بررسی تاثیر نحوه تفکر بر میزان توجه دیداری رای‌دهندگان به عناصر مختلف تبلیغات سیاسی منتشرشده در شبکه‌های اجتماعی، بوده است. براساس نتایج تحقیقات گذشته، نحوه تفکر، بر میزان توجه دیداری تاثیرگذار بوده است. نتایج پژوهش حاضر با آماره F مدل تقریبا بیش از 3.5 و در سطح معناداری 1% و 5% ، نشان داد که نحوه تفکر شهودی منجر به توجه دیداری بیشتر به عکس‌ها در مقایسه با متن‌ها و عکس‌های کاندیداها در مقایسه با عکس‌های مفهومی شده‌است. درمقابل، نحوه تفکر منطقی منجر به توجه دیداری بیشتر به متن‌ها در مقایسه با عکس‌ها و عکس‌های مفهومی در مقایسه با عکس‌های کاندیداها شد.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

The Effect of Thinking Style on Voter’s Visual Attention: An Experimental Study Using Eye Tracker

نویسندگان [English]

  • Mohammad Hossein Hezarkhani 1
  • Amir Khanlari 2
  • Rosa Hendijani 2
1 Ph.D. Candidate in Commercial Management, Faculty of Management, International branch of University of Tehran, Kish, Iran
2 Assistant Professor, Department of Business Management, Faculty of Management, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran
چکیده [English]

The use of modern marketing tools, such as neuromarketing, has expanded in recent research, and by considering the numerous investments in the use of these tools in the political elections of developed countries, this tool can play an important role in recognizing and examining voters' preferences. In addition, according to many investigations, considering thinking style of individuals can be the reliable predictor of individual’s decisions and behaviors. In this study, by using eye-tracking tool, researchers aimed to assess the impact of thinking style on visual attention of voters during observation of political advertisements published on social networks. Based on previous researches, thinking style has had great influence on visual attention of individuals. The result show that intuitive thinking style leads in paying more visual attention to the pictures in comparison with the texts as well as paying more visual attention to candidate pictures as opposed to conceptual pictures. Meanwhile, rational thinking style leads in paying more visual attention to texts in comparison with pictures as well as paying more visual attention to the conceptual pictures than the candidate pictures (F>3.5, 0.01<p-value<0.05).

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Neuromarketing
  • Political marketing
  • rational / intuitive thinking
  • visual attention
پیج، س. (1397). بازاریابی عصبی دیجیتال. تهران: ترمه.
رضایی، ا. (1391). بررسی ساختار عاملی و پایایی پرسش‌نامه سبک‌های پردازش اطلاعات شهودی - خردگرایانه در جامعه دانشجویان . تحقیقات علوم رفتاری، 20-29.
عبدی، ر. (1394). اهمیت روان‌شناسی در تبلیغات و بازاریابی. اولین کنفرانس بین‌المللی مدیریت و حسابداری با رویکرد ارزش‌آفرینی.
محمدیان، حسینی و محمودی. (1396). بازاریابی عصبی و اصول اخلاقی. تهران: ادیبان روز.
موسوی شفایی ،م. طالاری، م. (1395). جامعه‌پذیری سیاسی بستری برای بازاریابی سیاسی رابطه‌مند.فصلنامه علمی راهبرد،25 (2).
Ahmadi, M., Hendijani, R., & Alikhanzadeh, A. (2020). Experimental research and its application in the development of knowledge in management. Scientific journal of strategic management of organisational knowledge, 5-49.
Allinson, C., & Hayes, J. (1996). The cognitive style index: a measure of intution analysis for organizational research. Management studies, 119-135.
Ares, G., Mawad, F., Gimenez, A., & Maiche, A. (2014). Influence of rational and intutive thinking styles on food choice: preliminary evidence from eye tracking study with yogurt labels. Food quality and preferences, 28-37.
Ballco, F., & De magistris, T. (2017). Attention and choice use of eye tracking in choice behavior research for nutritional clames. XV EAAE congress.
Bargh, J., & Chartrand, T. (1999) The unbearable automaticity of being. American psychologist, 462-479.
Barnard, C. (1938). The functions of the executives. Cambridge: Harvard university press.
Björklund, F., & Backstorm, M. (2008) Individual differences in processing styles: vaidity of the REI. Scandinavian journal of psychology, 439-446.
Bridger, D. (2015). Decoding the Irrational Consumer: How to Commission, Run and Generate Insights from Neuromarketing Research. Kogan Page.
Burgos-Campero, A., & Vargas-Hernandez, J. (2013). Analitical approach to neuromarketing as a business strategy. Social and behavioral science, 517-525.
Crocker, J., Fiske, S., & Taylor, S. (1984). Schematic bases of belief change. attitudinal judgment, 197-226.
Dane, E. R. (2009). Should I trust my gut? Evaluating the role of task characteristics and domain expertise in intuitive and analytical decision making. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Volume 119.
Dane, E., & Pratt, M. (2007). Exploring intution and its role in managerial decision making. Academy of managment review, 33-54.
Dieckmann, A., Dippold, K., & Dietrich, H. (2009). Compensatory versus non compensatory models for predicting consumer preferences. Judgment & decision making, 200-213.
Duchowski, A. (2002). A breadth - first survey of eye tracking applications. Behvior research methods, instruments & computers, 455-470.
Epstein, S. (1994). Integration of the cognitive and psychodynamic unconcious. American psychologist, 709-724.
Epstein, S. (2003). Cognitive - experiential self theory of personality, Comprehensive handbook of psychology, 159-184.
Feddersen, T. J. (2004). Rational Choice Theory and the Paradox of Not Voting. JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC PERSPECTIVES, Vol. 18, No. 1.
Fitzsimons, G., Hutchinson, J., Williams, P., Alba, J., Chartrand, T., & Huber, J. (2002). Non conscious influences on consumer choice. Marketing Letters, 269-279.
Foxall, G. (1993) Consumer behavior as an evolotionary process, European jornal of marketing, 46-57.
Foxall, G., & Bhate, S. (1991). Cognitive style, personal envolvement and situation as determinants of computer use. Technovation, 183-200.
Gaschler, R., Mata, J., Stormer, V., Kuhnel, A., & Bilalic, M. (2010). Change ditection for new food labels. Food quality and preference, 140-147.
Gazzaniga, M., Ivri, R., & Mangun, G. (2008).Cognitive Neuroscience:The biology of the mind. New York: Hardcover.
Geer, J. (2012). The news media and the rise of negativity in presidential campaigns. Political science, 422-427.
Guisande, M., Paramo, M., Tinajero, C., & Almeida, L. (2007). Field depedence independence coginitive style: an analysis of attentional functioning. PSICOTHEMA, 572-577.
Hogarth, R. (2001). Educating intution. Chicago: University of Chicago.
Jordan, C. H.-H. (2007). Intuition and the correspondence between implicit and explicit self-esteem. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 1067-1079.
Kahneman, D. (2003). Maps of bounded rationality: Psychology for behavioral economics The Americal ecnomic review, 1449-1475.
Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking fast and slow.
Kahneman, D., & Frederick, S. (2002).Representativeness revisited: attribute substitution in intuitive judgment. Cambridge university press.
Karmarkar, U. (2011). Note on neuromarketing. Harvard business school marketing.
Keaton, S. (2017). Rational experiential inventory - 40. New Jersey: John Wiley and sons.
Kozhevnikov, M. (2007). cognitive styles in the context of modern psychology: toward an integrated framework of cognitive style. psychological bulletin, 464-481.
Krauss, D., Lieberman, J., & Olsan, J. (2004). The effects of rarional and experiential information processing of expert testimony in death penalty cases. Behaioral science and the law, (801-822).
Lapowsky, L. (2016). Here is how Facebook actually won Trump the presidency.
Lees-Marshment, J. (2009). Political marketing: Principles and applications. London: Routledge.
Lieberman , M., Eisenberger, N., & Williams, K. (2003). Does rejection hurt? An FMRI study of social exclusion. National library of medicine.
Lieberman, M. (2000). intuition: a social cognitive neuroscience approach. Psychological bulletin, 109-137.
Lovett, M. (2019). Empirical research on political marketing: a selected review. Customer needs & solutions, 49-56.
McMackin, J. S. (2000). When does explicit justification impair decision making? Applied Cognitive Psychology,14, 527-541.
Messick, S. (1984). The nature of cognitive styles: problems and promise in educational practice. Educational psychologist, 59-74.
Milosavljevic, M., & Cerf, M. (2008). First attention then intention: insights from comutational neuro science of vision. International journal of advertising, 381-387.
Phillips, W., Fletcher, J., Marks, A., & Hine, D. (2016). Thinking style and decision making: a meta analysis. Psychol bull, 260-290.
Phillips, W., Zeigler-Hill, V., & Shackelford, K. (2017). Rational experiential inventory in encyclopedia of personality and indivdual differnces.
Savig, H. (2003). Political marketing. Journal of political marketing, 21-38.
Shapiro, S., & Spence, M. (1997). managerial intution: A conceptual and operational framework. Business horizons, 63-68.
Sloman, S. (1996). The empirical case for two systems of reasoning. Psychological bulletin, 3-22.
Stanovic, K., & West, R. (2000). Indivisual differences in reasoning: implications for the rationality debate. Behavioral & brain sciences.
Tinajero, C., & Paramo, M. (1997). Field dependence-independence an academic achievment: A re-examination of their relationship. The British journal of educational psychology, 199-212.
Toyosawa, J., & Karasawa, K. (2004). Individual differences on judgment using the ratio bias and the Linda problem: adopting cest and Japanese version of REI. Japanese journal of social psychology, 85-92.
Usher, M., Russo, Z., Weyers, M., Branuner, R., & Zakay, D. (2011). The impact of the mode of taught in complex decisions: intuitive decisions are better. frontiers in psychology.
Vlasceanu, S. (2014). New directions in understanding the decision maiking process: Neuroeconomics & Neuromarketing. Social and behavioral sciences, 758-762.
Weinhardt, J., Hendijani, R., Harman, J., Steel, P., & Gonzalez, C. (2015). How analytic reasoning style and global thinking relate to understanding stocks and flows. Operations management.
Wendel, S. (2020). Designing for behavior change: Applying psychology and behavioral economics. O'Reilly Media.
Wilson, T. D. (1991). Thinking too much: Introspection can reduce the quality of preferences and decisions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60.
Witteman, C., Vandenbercken, J., Claes, L., & Godoy, A. (2009). Assessing rational and intutive thinking style. European journal of psychological assessment, 39-47.
Zubak-skees, C. (2016). Tracking TV Ads in the 2016 presidential race. Center for public integrity.