In the published article, the reference for “Vickers (2017)” was incorrectly inserted as “Vickers, N. J. (2017). Animal communication: when I'm calling you, will you answer too? Curr. Biol. 27, R713–R715. 10.1016/j.cub.2017.05.064 The correct reference should be:
“Vickers, D. L. (1972). Sorcerer's Apprentice: Head-Mounted Display and Wand (Ph.D. Thesis). The University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, United States.”
In the published article, there was also an error in “4.5. Eye Tracking,” paragraph 2 regarding the reported equipment costs. Costs were reported to range between “€100,000 and 300,000” but this should be “€100 and 30,000.” The corrected paragraph appears below:
“ET has been widely used in consumer neuroscience research to study visual behavior (e.g., fixation, gaze, pupil dilatation), customers' visual attention mechanisms and consumers' engagement (Zamani et al., 2016; Ungureanu et al., 2017). ET has several advantages: it is portable, non-invasive, simple to use and relatively inexpensive. ET has a cost ranging between €100 and 30,000 euros, depending on the level of the technology and whether the software to acquire and analyse data is included1. An ET experiment needs only a technician and, eventually, a data analyst. The average time needed to perform an ET experiment is about 15 min since the subject set-up is very fast. This time covers only the time needed to perform the experiment by the subject. Not all the ET has a high flexibility as some ET models might not work efficiently with glasses and contact lenses. ET is also characterized by a high level of integration with other tools due to its portability and because it is a “ready-to-use” device. To have more reliable results, ET should be used in combination with other tools.”
The authors apologize for these errors and state that this does not change the scientific conclusions of the article in any way. The original article has been updated.
Statements
Publisher’s note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
Summary
Keywords
neuromarketing, consumer neuroscience, review, iMotion, GRAIL, marketing, neurophysiological tools, physiological tools
Citation
Alvino L, Pavone L, Abhishta A and Robben H (2024) Corrigendum: Picking your brains: where and how neuroscience tools can enhance marketing research. Front. Neurosci. 18:1426471. doi: 10.3389/fnins.2024.1426471
Received
01 May 2024
Accepted
02 May 2024
Published
16 May 2024
Approved by
Frontiers Editorial Office, Frontiers Media SA, Switzerland
Volume
18 - 2024
Updates
Copyright
© 2024 Alvino, Pavone, Abhishta and Robben.
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Letizia Alvino l.alvino@nyenrode.nl
Disclaimer
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.