People Pay Less Attention Than You Think

The 'People Pay Less Attention Than You Think' law challenges the traditional advertising myth that consumers must actively 'pay attention' to be influenced. Rooted in the research of Robert Heath and the Ehrenberg-Bass Institute, this principle posits that the vast majority of advertising is processed via 'Low Attention Processing' (LAP). Unlike active learning, which requires conscious effort and is prone to skepticism and counter-arguing, LAP occurs at a subconscious level, building and refreshing memory structures without the consumer even realizing it. For marketers, this means that 'high-engagement' metrics are often red herrings. Success isn't found in winning a debate with the consumer's rational mind, but in ensuring your brand's distinctive assets are easily recognized during the split-second windows of passive exposure that characterize 90% of media consumption.

The foundational scholarship for this law emerged from the intersection of cognitive psychology and marketing science in the late 20th and early 21st centuries. While the industry was obsessed with 'recall' and 'persuasion' scores, Dr. Robert Heath challenged the status quo with his seminal work on the 'Low Attention Processing Model' (LAPM). In his 2001 monograph, 'The Hidden Power of Advertising,' and subsequent research published in the Journal of Advertising Research, Heath argued that ads processed with low attention are actually more durable in memory because they bypass the conscious mind's critical filters. This line of inquiry was further validated and expanded by the Ehrenberg-Bass Institute for Marketing Science, led by Professor Byron Sharp and Professor Jenni Romaniuk. Their research into 'Mental Availability' confirmed that advertising's primary job is not to change minds through logical arguments, but to build and refresh memory links (Brand Memory Structures) that make a brand easier to notice and buy. More recently, Orlando Wood and the team at System1 have provided neuroscientific evidence showing how 'broad-beam' attention—the kind of passive, right-brain processing used for stories and music—is far more effective at building long-term brand equity than the 'narrow-beam' focus required by hyper-rational, high-attention ads.

The mechanism behind this law is rooted in the dual-process theory of the human brain, popularized by Daniel Kahneman as System 1 (fast, intuitive, subconscious) and System 2 (slow, rational, conscious). Most marketers mistakenly believe they are talking to System 2. They aren't. System 2 is lazy and expensive to run; the brain avoids using it whenever possible. Consequently, most advertising is filtered through System 1.

When a consumer encounters an ad with low attention, they aren't 'learning' in the traditional sense. Instead, they are experiencing 'perceptual priming.' The brain registers the brand's colors, logos, and sounds without the 'gatekeeper' of the conscious mind questioning the claims. This is why high-attention advertising can sometimes be less effective; when people focus intensely on an ad, they start looking for reasons to disagree with it. They notice the fine print, they question the price, and they build resistance.

In contrast, passive processing allows brand associations to seep into the subconscious. This creates 'Fluency'—the ease with which a brand comes to mind. When a consumer is later standing in a supermarket aisle, they don't recall the specific claims of a 30-second TV spot. Instead, they feel a sense of 'familiarity' with a specific red can or a certain jingle. That familiarity is the result of repeated, low-attention exposures that have built a memory structure over time. The mathematical foundation of this is the 'Decay Rate' of memory versus the 'Reinforcement Rate' of passive exposure. If an ad is too complex, it requires high attention, which happens rarely. If an ad is simple and heavy on distinctive assets, it works every time it’s glimpsed for even half a second, ensuring the reinforcement rate stays ahead of the decay rate.