Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Draining the Will to Make the Sale: The Impermissibility of Marketing by Ego-Depletion

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Neuroethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We argue that many modern marketing techniques are morally problematic because they take advantage of a phenomenon known as ‘ego-depletion’ according to which willpower is, similar to physical strength, a limited resource that can be depleted by predictable factors. We argue that this is impermissible for the same reason that spiking someone’s drink to impair their judgment is impermissible.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Men as well as women are victims of date rape, but because women are the more frequent victims, and avoiding gender specificity is awkward, we are portraying the victim as female.

  2. We aren’t, of course, suggesting that the harms involved in depletion marketing or the use of Egonil are anywhere as severe as those involved in date rape. We hope, though, that some parallels will be clear.

  3. While this principle doesn’t say that attempting to change someone’s behavior in this way is wrong, it is intuitive that one should not attempt to do something wrong. Marketers who try but fail are still doing what they shouldn’t.

  4. Muraven [1].

  5. Muraven and Baumeister [2].

  6. We think the Vohs et al. [6] study is suggestive, but perhaps odd, since in the experiments the subjects didn’t really get to keep the products they “chose,” nor did they actually register for the courses. One might wonder whether this is really a choice rather than an expression of a preference. For our purposes it doesn’t seem important to resolve the matter.

  7. There have been recent concerns about the failure of an ego-depletion study to be successfully replicated. We discuss this in objection one below.

  8. We haven’t talked much about mechanisms, but it’s worth mentioning that one hypothesis that has received some level of confirmation is that glucose levels in relevant portions of the brain become depleted in these circumstances, leaving less energy to fuel resistance to temptation, etc. See Gailliot et al. [7].

  9. There is a good deal of research, however, about further results of depletion. Bruyneel et al. [8] have demonstrated that depleted subjects are more susceptible to “affective” product features—features that relate less to the product’s ability to serve the needed purpose and more to the way the product makes them feel. Burkley [9] found that depleted individuals were less able to resist persuasive argument and messaging, even when those arguments involved conclusions that the subjects would naturally oppose, e.g. shortening summer breaks for college students. Similarly, Wheeler et al. [10] found that while both depleted and non-depleted subjects were apt to be persuaded by strong arguments for conclusions they would be inclined to oppose, the depleted individuals were apt to be equally persuaded by strong and specious arguments.

  10. Cross, G. An All Consuming Century: Why Consumerism Won in Modern America. [11], p. 214.

  11. See, for example, Milliman [12]. A more recent study with a survey of previous studies is in Gueguen et al. [13]. Evidence that this is being done can be found in Crouch, Michelle [14]. “50 Supermarket Tricks You Still Fall For” Reader’s Digest, February 2014.

  12. Lindstrom, Martin [15]. Brandwashed. Crown, 2011, p. 222. Citing Rushkoff, Douglas. Coercion: Why We Listen to What They Say. (New York: Riverhead Books) 1999, p.197

  13. http://phys.org/news/2014-03-science-supermarkets-good.html, and http://www.realsimple.com/food-recipes/shopping-storing/more-shopping-storing/grocery-store-layout

  14. Bakan, Joel [16]. The Corporation. The Free Press. 2004, p.119

  15. Lindstrom, Martin. Brandwashed. Crown 2011. Chapter 4.

  16. Estimates about ad exposure vary widely. A conservative estimate of 362, of which only about 150 are noted, comes from a recent report by Media Dynamics, while the New York Times cites the Yankelovich Marketing Research Firm’s estimate of 5000. This higher number seems to count exposure to logos and brand icons, such as those on cereal boxes and soup cans as one passes through market aisles. Our guess is that the lower number is probably a better guide to depleting effects, but the higher number does reinforce the sense that advertising is everywhere. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/15/business/media/15everywhere.html?_r=0

    http://www.mediadynamicsinc.com/uploads/files/PR092214-Note-only-150-Ads-2mk.pdf

  17. There is a debate between Arrington [17] and Crisp [18] regarding the issue of advertising and the overriding of autonomy. That debate is orthogonal to what we are saying here.

  18. The results can be found in Hagger et al. [23].

  19. See, for example, http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/cover_story/2016/03/ego_depletion_an_influential_theory_in_psychology_may_have_just_been_debunked.html

  20. See Baumeister & Vohs [25].

  21. ibid., p. 574.

  22. Front. Psychol., 29 April 2016 | https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00621

  23. These cases were provided, in much the same words, by an anonymous referee.

  24. Even if they did do this, it only affects matters if the customers really understand and listen to the explanations. Children are unlikely to understand, but it’s doubtful that your average consumer has the scientific literacy to really grasp the problem.

  25. Lindstrom [26].

  26. Weinstein [27].

  27. We thank an anonymous reviewer from this journal for raising this objection.

  28. See Thaler and Sunstein [28] for example.

References

  1. Muraven, Mark. 2011. Ego depletion: Theory and evidence. In The Oxford Handbook of Human Motivation, ed. Richard M. Ryan, 111–126.

  2. Muraven, M., and R.F. Baumeister. 2000. Self-regulation and depletion of limited resources: Does self-control resemble a muscle? Psychological Bulletin 126 (2): 247–259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Baumeister, Roy F., Ellen Bratslavsky, Mark Muraven, and Dianne M. Tice. 1998. Ego depletion: Is the active self a limited resource? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 74 (5): 1252–1265. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.74.5.1252.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Muraven, Mark, R. Lorraine Collins, and Kristen Neinhaus. 2002. Self-control and alcohol restraint: An initial application of the self-control strength model. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors 16 (2): 113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Vohs, K.D., and T.F. Heatherton. 2000. Self-regulatory failure: A resource-depletion approach. Psychological Science 11 (3): 249–254.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Vohs, Kathleen D., Roy F. Baumeister, Brandon J. Schmeichel, Jean M. Twenge, Noelle M. Nelson, and Dianne M. Tice. 2008. Making choices impairs subsequent self-control: A limited-resource account of decision making, self-regulation, and active initiative. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 94 (5): 883–898. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.94.5.883.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Gailliot, Matthew T., Roy F. Baumeister, C. Nathan DeWall, Jon K. Maner, E. Ashby Plant, Dianne M. Tice, Lauren E. Brewer, and Brandon J. Schmeichel. 2007. Self-control relies on glucose as a limited energy source: Willpower is more than a metaphor. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 92 (2): 325–336. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.92.2.325.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Bruyneel, Sabrina, Siegfried Dewitte, Kathleen Vohs, and Luk Warlop. 2005. Sweet instigator - choosing increases susceptibility to affective product features. In SSRN scholarly paper ID 813704. Rochester: Social Science Research Network http://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=813704.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Burkley, Edward. 2008. The role of self-control in resistance to persuasion. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 34 (3): 419–431. doi:10.1177/0146167207310458.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Wheeler, S. Christian, Pablo Briñol, and Anthony D. Hermann. 2007. Resistance to persuasion as self-regulation: Ego-depletion and its effects on attitude change processes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 43 (1): 150–156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Cross, Gary. 2000. An all-consuming century: Why commercialism won in modern America. New York: Columbia University Press.

  12. Milliman, Ronald E. 1982. Using background music to affect the behavior of supermarket shoppers. Journal of Marketing 46 (3): 86–91. doi:10.2307/1251706.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Gueguen, Nicholas, Celine Jacob, Marcel Lourel, and Helene le Guellc. 2007. Effect of background music on consumer behavior. European Journal of Scientific Research 16 (2): 268–272.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Crouch, Michelle. 2014. 50 supermarket tricks you still fall for. Reader’s Digest. February.

  15. Lindstrom, Martin. 2011. Brandwashed: Tricks companies use to manipulate our minds and persuade us to buy. New York: Crown Business.

  16. Bakan, Joel. 2004. The corporation: The pathological pursuit of profit and power. New York: Free Press.

  17. Arrington, Robert. 1982. Advertising and behaviour control. Journal of Business Ethics 1 (1): 3–12.

  18. Crisp, Roger. 1987. Persuasive advertising, autonomy, and the creation of desire. Journal of Business Ethics 6 (5): 413–418.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Van Praet, Douglas. 2014. Unconscious branding: How neuroscience can empower (and inspire) marketing. New York: St Martin’s Griffin.

  20. Dooley, Roger. 2012. Brainfluence: 100 ways to persuade and convince consumers with Neuromarketing. New Jersey: Wiley.

  21. Carter, E., and McCollough, M. 2013. Is ego depletion too incredible? Evidence for the overestimation of the depletion effect. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 36 (6): 683–684.

  22. Hagger, M., and Chatzisarantis, N.L.D. 2014. It is premature to regard the ego-depletion effect as ‘too incredible’. Frontiers in Psychology 5: 1–2.

  23. Hagger, M.S., N.L.D. Chatzisarantis, H. Alberts, C.O. Anggono, C. Batailler, A.R. Birt, et al. 2016. A multilab preregistered replication of the ego-depletion effect. Perspectives on Psychological Science 11: 546–573.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Sripada, Chandra, Daniel Kessler, and John Jonides. 2016. Sifting signal from noise with replication science. Perspectives on Psychological Science 11 (4): 576–578.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Baumeister, R., and Kathleen D. Vohs. 2016. Misguided effort with elusive implications. Perspectives on Psychological Science 11 (4): 574–575.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Lindstrom, Martin. 2008. BuyOlogy: Truth and lies about why we buy. New York: Broadway Books.

  27. Weinstein, N.D. 1980. Unrealistic optimism about future life events. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 39: 806–820.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Thaler, Richard H., and Cass R. Sunstein. 2009. Nudge: Improving decisions about health. New Haven: Wealth and Happiness: Yale University Press.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Southern Methodist University, Dallas, TX, USA

    Ken Daley & Robert Howell

Authors
  1. Ken Daley
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Robert Howell
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ken Daley.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Daley, K., Howell, R. Draining the Will to Make the Sale: The Impermissibility of Marketing by Ego-Depletion. Neuroethics 11, 1–10 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12152-017-9335-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12152-017-9335-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation