评论
打印
Coke is just soda.
可乐只不过是苏打水。
Tylenol is just acetaminophen.
泰诺只不过是对乙酰氨基酚。
And Levi's are just jeans.
李维斯只是牛仔裤的象征。
Yet consumers go out of their way to select these specific brands over others.
然而，消费者却坚定地选择这些特定的品牌而不是其他品牌。
An economist would say, "How is this possible, that a rational consumer would be willing to pay more for exactly the same thing?"
经济学家会说："这怎么可能呢，一个理性的消费者会愿意为完全相同的东西支付更多的钱？
We love to think about ourselves as rational.
我们喜欢把自己想得很理性。
That's not how it works.
但是并不是这个道理。
A very famous study done by colleagues at Duke University flashed either the Apple logo or the IBM logo to two randomized groups of participants.
杜克大学的学者做了一项非常著名的研究，向两组随机的参与者闪现苹果的标志或IBM的标志。
The study found that after being subliminally exposed to the Apple logo, compared to when you'd been exposed to the IBM logo, participants performed better on creative tasks.
研究发现，在潜移默化地接触到苹果公司的标志后，与接触到IBM的标志时相比，参与者在创造性任务上表现得更好。
And the argument is that Apple has been telling you this story over and over again, that Apple is the brand for hip, cool, fun, creative people.
而论点是，苹果公司一直在一遍又一遍地告诉你这个故事，苹果是一个为时髦、酷、有趣、有创造力的人服务的品牌。
This is the true power of brands.
这就是品牌的真正力量。
They can influence our behavior in ways that extend way beyond the point of sale.
它们可以影响我们的行为，而影响的方式远远超出了销售点。
So to what degree can the influence of brands wreak havoc on our ability to make rational spending decisions?
那么，品牌的影响能在多大程度上破坏我们做出理性消费决定的能力呢？
This is your brain on money.
欢迎观看《金钱的大脑》栏目。
This is Americus Reed.
这位是阿梅里克斯·里德。
He studies identity and marketing at the University of Pennsylvania.
他在宾夕法尼亚大学的研究方向是自我认同和营销。
When I make choices about different brands, I'm choosing to create an identity.
当客户对不同的品牌做出选择时，他们在选择创造一个身份。
When I put that shirt on, when I put those shoes on, those jeans, that hat, someone is going to form an impression about what I'm about.
当我穿上那件衬衫，当我穿上那双鞋，那条牛仔裤，那顶帽子，有人会对我形成一个印象。
So if I'm choosing Nike over Under Armour, I'm choosing a kind of different way to express affiliation with sport.
因此，如果我选择耐克而不是Under Armour，我就选择了一种不同的方式来表达对运动的归属。
The Nike thing is about performance.
耐克的东西是关于性能的。
The Under Armour thing is about the underdog.
而Under Armour则是关于弱者的。
I have to choose which of these different conceptual pathways is most consistent with where I am in my life.
我必须选择这些不同的概念途径中哪一个最符合我的生活状态。
And once a consumer makes that choice, their relationship with a brand can deepen to the point where they identify with that brand like family.
而一旦消费者做出这样的选择，他们与品牌的关系就会加深，以至于他们像家人一样认同这个品牌。
And once you identify with a brand, it can shape the way you behave.
而一旦你认同了一个品牌，它就会塑造你的行为方式。
And it's really interesting because they will also, if someone talks bad about that product, brand, or service, they will be the first to go out and defend.
这真的很有趣，如果有人说这个产品、品牌或服务的坏话，他们会是第一个出去辩护的人。
Why?
为什么？
Because an attack on the brand is an attack on themselves.
因为对品牌的攻击就是对他们自己的攻击。
Michael Platt is a professor of neuroscience, marketing, and psychology whose research demonstrates how our perception of brands influences our decisions.
迈克尔-普拉特是一位神经科学、市场营销和心理学教授，他的研究证明了我们对品牌的看法如何影响我们的决定。
There's an idea in marketing, which is that we relate to brands in the same way we relate to people.
在市场营销中，有一个点，就是我们与品牌的关系就像我们与人的关系一样。
It's like, "I love this brand," or, "I hate this brand."
这就像，"我爱这个品牌，"或者，"我恨这个品牌"。
Of course, what people say, right, can often be different from what's really going on in their heads.
当然，人们所说的往往与他们头脑中想的事情不同。
So we thought, "Well, why don't we just ask the brain directly?"
所以我们想，"那么，我们为什么不直接问大脑的想法呢？"
Michael and his team observed the brains of iPhone users and Samsung Galaxy users with an MRI machine while they heard good, bad, and neutral news about Apple and Samsung.
于是迈克尔和他的团队用核磁共振仪观察了苹果用户和三星用户的大脑，同时他们听到了关于苹果和三星的好评、差评和中立评价。
Apple customers showed a brain empathy response toward Apple that was exactly what you'd see in the way you would respond to somebody in your own family.
苹果用户表现出对苹果的大脑移情反应，这正是你对自己家人的反应方式。
Strangely, Samsung users didn't have any positive or negative responses when good or bad news was released about their brand.
奇怪的是，当关于他们品牌的好消息或坏消息被发布时，三星用户没有任何积极或消极的反应。
The only evidence that Samsung users showed was reverse empathy for Apple news.
三星用户表现出的唯一证据是对苹果新闻的反向共鸣。
Meaning if the Apple headline was negative, their brain reflected a positive response.
这意味着如果苹果的头条新闻是负面的，他们的大脑就会反映出积极的反应。
You know, it really shows us that Apple has completely defined the market here.
你知道，这真的向我们表明，苹果在这里已经完全定义了市场。
Samsung customers, it seems, from their brain data, are only buying Samsung 'cause they hate Apple.
从他们的大脑数据来看，三星用户似乎只购买三星，因为他们讨厌苹果。
The kicker?
关键是什么？
The Samsung users didn't report feeling the results their MRIs showed.
三星用户并没有报告感觉到他们的核磁共振成像显示的结果。
What was happening in their brains and what they reported feeling towards Apple and Samsung, were totally different.
他们大脑中发生的事情和他们报告的对苹果和三星的感觉是完全不同的。
Most people just don't realize that they are subconsciously choosing brands because those brands have some kind of self-expressive value.
大多数人没有意识到，他们下意识地选择品牌是因为这些品牌有某种自我表达的价值。
You can see there's a lot of power here in terms of shaping consumers' decisions.
你可以看到，在塑造消费者的决定方面，这拥有很大的力量。
As we learn more and more about that, we have to think much more deeply about the ethical, legal, and societal implications of doing that.
随着我们对这一点的了解越来越多，我们必须更深入地思考这样做的道德、法律和社会影响。
So, as consumers, what can we do to make informed choices?
那么，作为消费者，我们能做些什么来做出明智的选择？
Well, the best thing we can do is to be aware of the influence that brands hold.
我们能做的最好的事情就是意识到品牌所拥有的影响力。
I think it's important to always pause and think a little bit about, "Okay, why am I buying this product?"
我认为重要的是要经常停下来，想一想，"好吧，我为什么要买这个产品？
And like it or not, brands aren't going anywhere.
不管你喜不喜欢，品牌是不会消失的。
I've heard lots of people push back and say that, "I'm not into brands." I take a very different view.
我听到很多人反驳说，"我不喜欢品牌"。但是我有不同的意见。
They're not doing anything any different than what someone who affiliates with a brand is doing.
他们所做的事情与那些与品牌合作的人所做的事情没有任何不同。
They have a brand, it's just an anti-brand brand.
他们有一个品牌，这只是一个反品牌的品牌。
And I think about, what is it that I've learned about identity over time?
我想了想，随着时间的推移，我对身份的认识是什么？
I think a lot of it has to do with the fundamental need that we as humans have to have support systems.
我想很多都与我们人类对支持系统的基本需求有关。
Perhaps it was the church, it was the community, it was these other institutions that existed.
也许是教堂，是社区，是其他机构。
Now, brands have stepped in as pillars of our identity.
现在，品牌已经介入，成为我们身份的支柱。
So I'm very much motivated to see that in that positive light.
因此，我非常有动力从这种积极的角度来看待这个问题。
