Who Really Won the Super Bowl?

BartlebyScrivener writes "In the latest development of the new field known as 'neuro marketing,' Marco Iacoboni and his group of researchers at the UCLA Ahmanson-Lovelace Brain Mapping Center used functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to measure brain responses in a group of subjects while they were watching this year's Super Bowl ads. The findings are reported at Edge: The Third Culture."

Comments

Re:Who Really Won The SuperBowl?

[TubeSteak]

If you RTFA, you'd realize the answer they're trying to find is actually Which advertisers won during the Super Bowl

SPOILER ALERT

Who won the Super Bowl ads competition? If a good indicator of a successful ad is activity in brain areas concerned with reward and empathy, two winners seem to be the 'I am going to Disney' ad and the Bud 'office' ad. In contrast, two big floppers seem to be the Bud 'secret fridge' ad and the Aleve ad.

Here's the Google Video link to all the ads so you can decide for yourself.

Personally, I thought the 'secret fridge' commercial was funny.

Re:Why not both?

[Yunzil]

There is a big jump in amygdala activity when the dinosaur crushes the caveman, as shown below. The scene looks funny and has been described as funny by lots of people, but your amygdala still perceives it as threatening, another example of disconnect between verbal reports on ads and brain activity while viewing the ads.

I had a big jump in brain activity when I saw that, but it's because I was thinking, "Dinosaurs and humans lived millions of years apart, you idiots. >:("

Re:Who Really Won the SuperBowl...

[aztektum]

Wait wait, how did he win? The Super Bowl was broadcast on ABC this year. Shouldn't that be "Disney Corp"?

Re:Who Really Won The SuperBowl?

[pizzaman100]

Not really. ESPN had a poll the day after the game, and the majority (like 70%)from 48 states said the refs threw the game (exceptions being WV and PA). These results are despite the liklyhood that there are way more Steeler fans than Sehawk fans.

The Seattle 'big chance' plays were pretty much all called back on questionable penalties. And the Pitt big plays were given to them (the qb getting tackled on the 1 yard line and them calling it a TD comes to mind).

Geez, first time I've discussed sports on Slashdot. :)

Re:Who Really Won The SuperBowl?

[mdfst13]

"the qb getting tackled on the 1 yard line and them calling it a TD comes to mind"

Dude, if you watch the play, it's obvious that his arm crossed the goal plane (it's not a line, since it sticks up into space). He was no where near the 1 yard line. If the ball was short of the goal, it was short by less than an inch.

Part of the problem is that the refs were actually bending over backwards trying to *avoid* penalizing Seattle. For example, Locklear was called for two holds, but actually committed ten. Why was he only called twice? Because most of his holds didn't affect the play, so they warned him instead. Seattle happened to get a big play on one of the times they called him for holding, but at the time of the call that wasn't known. Further, if he hadn't pulled Haggans down from behind, Haggans would have sacked Hasselback before the pass, which would have negated the big play anyway.

There was a pretty complete discussion of this at http://www.footballoutsiders.com/2006/02/09/rambli ngs/every-play-counts/3640/

The refs really didn't call this game any differently than they call any other game. They don't like calling holding, as it happens on most plays and can devastate an offense when called on third down. They warned Locklear on the third downs (except for the first one) and evened up by calling him on first down.