Seeing Is Not Perceiving: When Synthetic Consumers Can and Cannot Pretest Visual Marketing
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Marketers now deploy generative AI agents as synthetic consumers to pretest visual assets such as logos, packaging, and advertising at a fraction of human-panel cost. However, this procedure assumes that a model seeing a visual cue can also perceive its consumer meaning, which is largely untested. We stress-test the assumption using six canonical visual marketing experiments, varying the two levers managers control: model generation (GPT-4o-mini vs. GPT-5.4-mini) and input format (plain text vs. JSON). Every resulting configuration passed the manipulation checks; however, none of the configurations reproduced more than two of the six human effects, and the remainder were nonsignificant. The one exception was a significant reversal of the human pattern. Providing conceptual or empirical evidence through in-context learning steers average responses toward the human effect. Yet steering has a limit: even when it succeeds, a configuration reproduces less than half of the natural spread of human responses and so understates consumer heterogeneity. We integrate these results into an AI governance protocol (Calibrate, Intervene, Deploy) that delineates when synthetic consumers can responsibly screen creatives and when human panels remain necessary.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 3 of its 65 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 22 Sep 2026.
Builds on
3 of 65 references.
References · 3
- 2022BERTopic: Neural topic modeling with a class-based TF-IDF procedurecited by 801
- 2024Does Prompt Formatting Have Any Impact on LLM Performance?cited by 141
- 2025Digital Twins as Funhouse Mirrors: Five Key Distortionscited by 11
Built on by
Not cited yet.