Happiness plays a central role in shaping how consumers interact with products. It influences satisfaction, repeat engagement, and long-term brand relationships—yet it remains one of the most difficult emotional experiences to measure objectively.
This article explores how consumer neuroscience uses multimodal biometrics, including EEG and fNIRS, to study affective responses during product experiences. By examining neural and physiological indicators associated with valence, arousal, and evaluative processing, researchers and product teams can gain deeper insight into how experiences are perceived—beyond what consumers are able or willing to report
Table of Contents
Have you ever felt that tiny spark of joy when a product works exactly the way you hoped? Maybe it’s the first sip of coffee that tastes just right, or an app interface that feels effortlessly intuitive.
These moments matter. When experiences feel good, people return. When they feel rewarding, they are remembered.
Despite its importance, happiness remains difficult to quantify in market research and UX testing. For decades, measurement has relied heavily on self-report questions such as “How satisfied were you?” or “Did you enjoy the product?” while valuable, these measures offer only a partial view.
People may struggle to articulate why they liked something, or their responses may be influenced by expectations, context, or social desirability (9–11).
Happiness is inherently subjective, but it can be studied through physiological and neural indicators associated with affective processing. During product experiences, changes in neural activity related to emotional valence, arousal, and evaluation can be measured using complementary biometric methods.
EEG provides time-resolved insight into neural responses as experiences unfold, while fNIRS captures slower cortical hemodynamic changes associated with affective evaluation (1–4).
Together, these measures can complement traditional research approaches helping move beyond what consumers say to better understand how experiences are processed.
What Is Happiness in Consumer Neuroscience
In neuroscience and affective science, emotional experience is commonly described along multiple dimensions, most notably valence (pleasantness) and arousal (intensity) (1,8). Within consumer research, these dimensions are used to characterize how individuals experience products and stimuli, such as tasting a beverage, interacting with a digital interface, or viewing an advertisement (1,8)
Research examining affective processing in consumer-relevant contexts has identified the involvement of prefrontal regions associated with reward evaluation and emotional valence, including the orbitofrontal cortex (OFC) and anterior prefrontal areas (2, 3,12,13), as well as regions implicated in emotion processing and regulation, such as the medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC) and dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) (4,14,15).
Rather than representing a single neural signal, happiness in consumer neuroscience is typically approached as a multidimensional affective state emerging from sensory processing, emotional engagement, and evaluative judgment
The Many Layers of Consumer Happiness
Consumer happiness is not a single signal but a network of emotional layers that unfold during experience:
- Immediate Sensory Pleasure: Initial exposure to a product’s sensory attributes such as taste, texture, or visual appeal can be associated with activity in prefrontal regions linked to reward and pleasantness evaluation, including the OFC and anterior prefrontal cortex (2, 3).These responses are interpreted as reflecting hedonic evaluation rather than direct measures of happiness itself.
- Affective Engagement: As interaction continues, emotional engagement may increase. EEG research has shown that patterns such as frontal alpha asymmetry (FAA) are commonly associated with approach-related motivation and preference-related responding, while other frequency-band changes (e.g., theta activity) have been linked to emotional and cognitive processing demands, depending on task context (5, 6).
- Reflective Satisfaction: Higher-order evaluation involves prefrontal integration of affective information, where regions such as the mPFC have been implicated in processing emotional valence and self-referential evaluation in controlled experimental settings (4)
- Regulatory Balance: The DLPFC has been consistently linked to emotion regulation and evaluative control, contributing to how affective responses are modulated rather than amplified indiscriminately (4).
Together, these processes describe how positive affective experience is constructed through interacting neural systems, rather than produced by a single “happiness center.”
How Neuroscience Measures Happiness
Neuroscientific tools do not measure happiness directly. Instead, they capture neural and physiological indicators associated with affective processing, which can be interpreted in relation to subjective experience.
1. EEG: Capturing Emotional Time Signatures
EEG can track how quickly and intensely the brain responds to pleasure by measuring electrical activity across the scalp. Unlike self-reports, which capture only post-experience reflection, EEG tracks emotional responses in real time, with high temporal resolution.
Commonly studied EEG markers in consumer neuroscience include:
- Late Positive Potential (LPP): Often associated with emotional evaluation and sustained attentional engagement (5).
- Frontal Alpha Asymmetry (FAA): One of the more consistently used EEG measures in neuromarketing research, frequently associated with approach–avoidance tendencies and preference-related outcomes (5, 6,16).
- Other frequency-band changes (e.g., theta): Linked to affective and cognitive processing demands, though interpretations are highly context-dependent (5).
These EEG patterns are best understood as indicators of affective engagement rather than direct measures of pleasure or satisfaction.
2. fNIRS: Mapping the Geography of Pleasure
While EEG tells us when happiness happens, functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) tells us where in the brain. By measuring oxygenated blood flow in cortical regions, fNIRS pinpoints the neural networks involved in for evaluating and maintaining hedonic pleasure
In product design research and packaging testing, fNIRS reveals which design elements trigger genuine pleasure versus mere attention. For example, a product’s visual appeal might capture attention (measured by eye tracking), but only activation in the OFC and frontal pole confirms that it delivers satisfying emotional rewards.
fNIRS studies relevant to consumer research have reported:
- Prefrontal oxyhemoglobin changes associated with pleasant versus unpleasant taste stimuli, particularly in anterior and orbitofrontal regions (2, 3).
- Frontal pole (aPFC) involvement in hedonic tone, with valence-related differences observed across preferred and disliked foods and beverages (3).
- Valence-dependent activation patterns in the mPFC and DLPFC during emotional processing tasks (4).
Importantly, fNIRS captures correlates of cortical involvement and should not be interpreted as identifying the precise neural source or cause of happiness.
3. Peripheral and Behavioral Correlates
Beyond brain activity, physiological responses reinforce emotional evidence and provide converging measures of happiness:
- Electrodermal Activity (EDA) Widely used as an index of emotional arousal, reflecting sympathetic nervous system activity (7,17).
- Heart Rate Variability (HRV) : Cardiac measures, including heart rate variability and inter-beat interval, have been associated with emotional valence and attentional engagement in marketing research, with effects varying by stimulus characteristics (6,18)
- Facial Expression Analysis (FEA) captures facial expressions of joy, surprise, and contentment that appear within milliseconds of their emotions. In consumer insights research, FEA reveals authentic emotional reactions that surveys might miss due to social desirability bias.(7)
No single peripheral measure uniquely identifies happiness; their value lies in convergence across modalities (1)
4. Machine Learning Integration
Recent research has explored using machine learning approaches to predict emotional responses from multimodal biometric data.
Studies applying Random Forest techniques to data combining Electrodermal Activity (EDA) and Facial Expression Analysis (FEA) have achieved 81% accuracy in predicting consumer ad preferences (7). In these analyses, features including Attention, Engagement, Joy, and Disgust were identified as pivotal predictive features.
These findings suggest that happiness-related responses can be examined as patterns across multiple measurement modalities. When combined, neural and physiological measures provide data that machine-learning models can use to classify preference-related outcomes, rather than emotional states per s
The Neural Architecture of Happiness
Taken together, the literature suggests that positive consumer experience engages a distributed prefrontal network, integrating sensory input, affective processing, and evaluative control:
| Region | Role in Hedonic Processing | Measurement |
| Orbitofrontal Cortex | Subjective reward and pleasantness (2, 3) | fNIRS / fMRI |
| Frontal Pole | Sustained hedonic tone (3) | fNIRS |
| Medial Prefrontal Cortex | Satisfaction and self-referential evaluation (4) | fNIRS |
| Dorsolateral prefrontal cortex: | Modulation and evaluative control (4) | ffNIRS / EEG (frontal activity patterns) |
| Frontal Electrodes | Positive valence patterns (5, 6) | EEG |
This network perspective reinforces that happiness-related experience is constructed through interacting processes rather than localized to a single signal or region.
What This Means for Researchers & Product Designers
Understanding happiness-related processing at the neural and physiological level allows researchers to complement traditional self-report methods when evaluating products and experiences:
- Product and sensory testing: Multimodal measures can help identify affective responses associated with different formulations or designs.
- Advertising research: EEG and facial measures can reveal moments of positive engagement that may not be fully captured by recall-based surveys.
- User experience research: Physiological indicators can help distinguish between experiences that are functional and those associated with positive affective engagement.
- Packaging and branding: Combining attentional and affective measures provides insight into how designs are processed beyond visual salience.
These approaches do not replace self-report; they enrich interpretation by adding converging evidence
Best Practices for Measuring Happiness-Related Responses
- Synchronize neural, physiological, and behavioral data streams
- Control stimulus duration and presentation order
- Interpret biomarkers cautiously and contextually
- Avoid equating single measures with emotional states
- Maintain transparency in analysis and inference
Where Measuring Happiness Goes From Here
As neurotechnology becomes more portable and analytical methods advance, consumer neuroscience is increasingly able to study affective responses in more naturalistic contexts. Wearable EEG systems and compact fNIRS devices expand the range of environments in which affect-related data can be collected.
Future work will benefit from integrating physiological indicators, self-report, and behavioral outcomes—allowing researchers to better understand how positive experience relates to long-term engagement and well-being, without overstating what any single measure can reveal.
References:
1 Bettiga, D., Bianchi, A. M., Lamberti, L., & Noci, G. (2020). Consumers emotional responses to functional and hedonic products: a neuroscience research. Frontiers in psychology, 11, 559779. Link.
2 Mai, J., Li, S., Wei, Z., & Sun, Y. (2025). Implicit Measurement of Sweetness Intensity and Affective Value Based on fNIRS. Chemosensors, 13(2), 36. Link.
3 Minematsu, Y., Ueji, K., & Yamamoto, T. (2018). Activity of frontal pole cortex reflecting hedonic tone of food and drink: fNIRS study in humans. Scientific reports, 8(1), 16197. Link.
4 Yükselen, G., Öztürk, O. C., Canlı, G. D., & Erdoğan, S. B. (2023). Investigating the neural correlates of processing basic emotions: A functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) study. BIOrXIV, 2023-08. Link.
5 Byrne, A., Bonfiglio, E., Rigby, C., & Edelstyn, N. (2022). A systematic review of the prediction of consumer preference using EEG measures and machine-learning in neuromarketing research. Brain Informatics, 9(1), 27. Link.
6 Baldo, D., Viswanathan, V. S., Timpone, R. J., & Venkatraman, V. (2022). The heart, brain, and body of marketing: Complementary roles of neurophysiological measures in tracking emotions, memory, and ad effectiveness. Psychology & Marketing, 39(10), 1979-1991. Link.
7 Marques, J. A. L., Neto, A. C., Silva, S. C., & Bigne, E. (2025). Predicting consumer ad preferences: Leveraging a machine learning approach for EDA and FEA neurophysiological metrics. Psychology & Marketing, 42(1), 175-192. Link.
8 Mehrabian, A., and Russell, J. (1974). An Approach to Environmental Psychology. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. Link.
9 Berridge, K., and Winkielman, P. (2003). What is an unconscious emotion?(The case for unconscious” liking”). Cogn. Emot. 17, 181–211. Link.
10 Chamberlain, L., and Broderick, A. J. A. (2007). The application of physiological observation methods to emotion research. Qual. Mark. Res. 10, 199–216. Link.
11 Groeppel-Klein, A., and Baun, D. (2001). The role of customers’ arousal for retail stores-results from an experimental pilot study using electrodermal activity as indicator. Adv. Consum. Res. 28, 412–419. Link.
12 Kringelbach, M. L. The human orbitofrontal cortex: linking reward to hedonic experience. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 6, 691 (2005). 7. Link.
13 Rolls, E. T. Taste, olfactory, and food reward value processing in the brain. Prog. Neurobiol. 127–128, 64–90 (2015). Link.
14 Ochsner, K. N., Silvers, J. A., & Buhle, J. T. (2012). Functional imaging studies of emotion regulation: a synthetic review and evolving model of the cognitive control of emotion. Annals of the new York Academy of Sciences, 1251(1), E1-E24. Link.
15 Balconi, M., & Molteni, E. (2016). Past and future of near-infrared spectroscopy in studies of emotion and social neuroscience. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 28(2), 129-146. Link.
16 Davidson, R. J. (1998). Anterior electrophysiological asymmetries, emotion, and depression: Conceptual and methodological conundrums. Psychophysiology, 35(5), S0048577298000134 607–614. Link.
17 Boucsein, W. (2012). Electrodermal activity. Springer science & business media. Link.
18 Lang, A. (2014). What can the heart tell us about thinking?. In Measuring psychological responses to media messages (pp. 99-111). Routledge.
