The color of confusion
What if I told you that the color pink not only doesn’t aid breast cancer awareness, it actually lowers it? What if I said that content that is focused on a certain gender actually has less impact on that gender than generalized, gender-neutral content?
Well, that’s the conclusion from a study highlighted in the July-August edition of Harvard Business Review. In the article “The Color Pink is Bad For Fighting Breast Cancer,” researcher Stefano Puntoni, an associate professor of marketing management at the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University, discusses the results from a three-year study he conducted with two partners at the London Business School. In the study, they looked at the impact of gender cues used in advertising on the recall of female viewers. The experiment – run numerous times – consistently showed that women were less likely to recall breast cancer awareness banner ads on a website when the site was geared to women. Additionally, “those who saw a pink ad about breast cancer were significantly less likely to say that they’d contract the disease than those who saw an ad with neutral colors.”
What’s going on here? The researchers point to the psychological study of defense responses in the human brain, which, when triggered, often result in strong reactions of denial. They believe that the more breast cancer is tied to the individual – through gender cues such as language or the color pink – the more the individual is likely to go into denial, resulting in worse recall for the person and less impact from the message.
The implications of this type of research could have a profound impact on marketers. For one, what about all that pink used to promote breast cancer awareness? But even more so, what about the long-held belief that customizing content to the target audience is a good thing? The researchers point out that the negative impact of gender cues only held true when the content itself (in this case, breast cancer) was negative (thus the reaction of denial). But in healthcare, so much of our content could be perceived as negative in nature, as we try to help people deal with everything from cancer to heart disease to diabetes.
The article’s timing is also interesting given the recent announcement by the Food and Drug Administration that by October 2012, cigarette makers will have to include graphic images such as diseased lungs or a man blowing smoke from his tracheotomy hole in his throat on cigarette packaging. The use of these images and stronger label language is intended to help curb smoking. Yet in a study highlighted by Martin Lindstrom in Buyology, the use of fMRI technology has shown that the more graphic the cigarette package warning, the more activity is seen in the part of the brain that induces smoking. In other words, perversely, the harsher the warning, the more people want to smoke. Perhaps the same psychological “denial” mechanism is at work here.
As a healthcare marketer, what do you do with these insights? Do you adjust your strategy for promoting breast cancer awareness, or reconsider the use of pink or other “gender-based” cues? Does this change your thinking on how to target messages and content in a larger sense?
Obviously, one study shouldn’t blow up all you know about marketing, and if you’ve been measuring results of your efforts consistently, you’ll have a firm idea of what works and what doesn’t for your organization. But boy, does this kind of research raise question and inspire dialogue. What do you think?
Wow – this is fascinating and thought-provoking. I can see how it makes sense – women associate breast cancer with pink, and subsequently psychologically are adverse to retaining the message. I am sure this same effect is happening with other branding colors or images: the red and white of Coca-Cola leaves you with a psychological feeling of being refreshed. Golden Archea reminds me of greasy fries.
Pink has become so pervasive in marketing breast cancer awareness, events, fundraisers, etc., that I don’t think it’s seen as a gender cue. Pink has become part of breast cancer’s brand. Just as the use of green identifies environmental causes, the viewer might immediately identify pink with breast cancer, depending on the other visual cues presented. For example, if the pink is used with an image of a cocktail or high heels, it’s a “girls night.” Used with the pink ribbon or a runner, the view thinks breast cancer event.
If a woman is in denial about her chances of breast cancer, pink could be a cue for avoidance. If the goal of the communication is to inform about the disease, the importance of self-examination, etc., perhaps in light of this study, pink should be avoided. But if the goal is to generate interest in a fundraising event, pink will communicate the cause immediately.