Obama vs Romney: Their Hormonal Quotient® Makes The Difference | DervalResearch.
I have heard much about the influence of testosterone and estrogen in the mother’s womb on characteristics (physical and emotional). Specifically whether somebody is gay or straight (oddly enough I never thought this was all that outlandish, but then I tend to believe most of what I hear). But this is the first window into a world of “applied prenatal hormonization (my name, sorry).” And fascinating it is!
In fact, based on my own index finger and ring finger (ringless probably because of the relationship between the two) I learned the following about myself: my HQ is “estrogen” and I share this trait with Brad Pitt, Mel Gibson and Clint Eastwood. I am a trend setter, I am diplomatic. I am meticulous. I am also cheap, as I did not order the full $29, 15 page Hormonal Quotient® Estrogen Report.
The link above will take you to an analysis of the presidential contenders based on their assumed finger lengths (I doubt either volunteered the exact measurements of their index and ring fingers).
The applications of this marketing are obvious. I can see grand segmentation plans based on the length of index fingers, and I am quite excited at the prospect of conducting focus groups among very testosterone Hormonal Quotient® persons (which would include, apparently, most US Presidents, Angela Merkel and of course, Margaret Thatcher. While there is nothing on the site to confirm this, I would imagine that most Canadian Prime Ministers fall on the estrogen side of the Hormonal Quotient®.
Filed under: Behavioral Economics, Uncategorized, behavioural economics, neuromarketing, strategy, subliminal advertising