NEUROMARKETING. Branislav R. Tanasic

      Commercial sources can provide specific data, but personal sources give a wider picture, evaluate the product and give a quality assessment, which is a crucial, perhaps crucial, information for the future user.

       Alternative assessment

      At this stage, a potential buyer, who initially has a solid purchasing intent, is slowly transforming and begins to make a buying decision. This phase is extremely interesting for marketers because they want to know how consumers make the decision and choose a specific brand? As a consumer will behave during the decision-making process at this stage, it depends on the individual characteristics of the consumer and the specificity of the purchasing situation. In one case, the consumer carefully calculates and logically contemplates, while for the second time, the same consumer, does little or even nothing in the assessment, simply purchases impulsively and intuitively. Marketers will explore consumers to find out how they choose one of the offered alternatives. If this process is revealed, marketers will take steps to influence customer decisions (Kotler & Armstrong, 2012: 154) New approaches to consumer behavior research will be reflected in the application of new techniques that can disclose elements in the decision-making mechanism, invisible and inaccessible to traditional research methods. One of these approaches is neuromarketing, which will be the subject of research, but the question of the existence of a universal purchasing behavior model, as Valas (Walas Maelani, 2003) called it "shopping button", will be open and difficult to solve the enigma for a long time.

       Purchase decision

      The final decision on buying a tourism product is a synergy of a large number of influential factors. In addition to the above-mentioned decision-making process, which does not always have to include all the steps, the decision can correct some of the major unexpected effects. The first factor may be the attitude of others; that is, something essential for the customer at this stage to warn him to be exposed at too high a cost and to buy a cheaper product. This suggestion can significantly influence and change the final decision. Another possibility of altering the plan is an unforeseen situation factor. A sudden event, such as sudden changes in prices, reduced rates, shifting to worse jobs, injuries to work, or traffic, a family event, may have a significant impact on the changes that have already been made.

       Post-buying behavior

      After the purchase is made, the consumer may be satisfied or dissatisfied, rarely indifferent towards the purchase made, which directly affects his buying behavior. The content of satisfaction is a product of the relationship between consumer expectations and the delivered value of the product/service. What is the gap between the expectations and the performance of the larger purchased, is the greater dissatisfaction of consumers (Kotler & Armstrong, 2012: 154). For companies, it is extremely important to buy a bargain, because after purchasing the buyer changes status, it becomes a part of the "mouth to mouth" or oral propaganda into which it incorporates its view of the product, and passes on as a personal experience of the quality of the purchase.

      2.3.3. Model of a choice of tourist destination

      Based on the research of Fred van Raaij (1986), on the perception and preferences of tourists, Woodside and Lysonski develop a model of behavior, ie, consumer decision-making in tourism. The proposed Decrop model (A. Decrop) adds: "The general model of Woodside and Lysonski-og (1989), about the choice of a tourist destination, is probably the most popular concept to date," (Decrop, 2006: 30) demonstration model of choice.

      Woodside & Lysonski for the proposed model says that there is strong evidence supporting the idea that consumer perceptions and preferences should be the basis of tourism marketing and tourism behavior research (Woodside & Lysonski, 1989: 8). Structural models are popular in consumer behavior research in tourism because they describe the major cognitive, affective and behavioral variables involved in the decision-making process and suggest the steps that link them. The behavioral model of tourists found by Woodside and Lysonsky includes eight groups of variables that make up nine interrelations. (Arrows on Diagram 1 show that the variables are interrelated). The model is limited to a few key variables that make it easy to understand and easy to use in empirical studies and for managerial use. Comparison with some of the previously offered models shows that Woodside and Lysonky are adding a few details like that is the mental categorization of the process between spontaneous destination evocation, destination rejection, non-open-minded destinations, and unavailable destinations but are subject to interest (Decrop, 2006: 31).

      Diagram no. 1, A General Model of Traveler Destination Choice,

      Source: Woodside & Lisonsky (1989), Journal of Traveler Research, 26(8) 1-9

      During the process of collecting and mentoring the destination data, Vudsajd and Lisonus, all destinations that consumers are thinking of are classified into one of four categories: destination for consideration, inert set, inept set, and destinations that are unavailable for various reasons but are tempting and subject to interest and consideration (Woodside & Lisonsky, 1989: 1-9).

      Narayana & Markin, define an inept set as destinations for which the consumer knows, but does not consider them during the decision-making process because of the resulting negative perception based on personal experience or negative information (Narayana & Markin, 1975: 1-6 ). The inert set includes destinations that the consumer has ambivalent, neutral attitude, usually due to lack of information about them, so they do not enter into the process of consideration. As far as unavailable destinations are concerned, they are usually attractive tourist sites that may be of interest to you, but realistic circumstances prevent the consumer from seeing them. Limiting factors can be financial, geographical, administrative procedures, visas or some other obstacle (Hanlan, Fuller & Wilde, 2005: 6). Affective model associations, implying the specific feelings that consumers make towards the destination, which may be related to a particular brand, are actually a play that presumes a lot of sunshine, entertainment, prestigious beaches, and quality restaurants. Relationships with favored destinations or destinations are based on these affective associations (Woodside & Carr, 1988: 2-6; Muhlbacher & Woodside 1987: 299-319).

      There are also certain limitations of this decision-making model for the destination. First of all, it omits the marketing-mix of process variables, the essential role of people connected with marketing services, the traditional 4P marketing mix. (Hanlan, Fuller & Wilde, 2005: 8)

      2.3.4. Decision-making model

      The subject of decision-making is very diverse; there are numerous theories that explain decision-making in different areas. (Hanson, 2005: 5) The decision problem can be described as a process of the mental calculations through which it is organized and predicts the outcome, often with multiple possibilities (Kahneman & Tversky, 1984: 341).

      The foundations of the general decision model were established by Brim with his associates through the following steps (Brim & all 1962: 9):

       Problem identification

       Collecting the necessary information

       Selecting possible solutions

       Evaluation of selected options

       Choice of solutions.

      Anderson represents the model of decision-making (Anderson, 1965), which first emphasizes the importance of information on which the consumer is based on the decision-making process, but includes the filtering phase of the collected data based on the judgment, sentiment, norms and value criteria of the decision maker. Also, Anderson underlines the role of the consumer, and his satisfaction with the purchase, as a precondition for re-purchasing products/services (Anderson, 1965: 1). The Model of Decision Making Nicosia and Meyer (Nicosia & Mayer, 1976), in the foreground, highlights the company's intentions to communicate with consumers.