A debate has arisen in this journal regarding the utility of psychophysiological measures in general; and of electroencephalographic measures in particular, for evaluating the specific effects of advertising executions. We briefly summarize the positions and replies that have been set forth. Although each is found to have something to contribute, it is also clear that additional basic research using complex persuasion materials in consumer settings is necessary before specific cognitive, emotional, and behavioral advertising effects can be inferred from psychophysiological data. This raises general questions regarding the goal and value of the psychophysiological enterprise. It is suggested that a psychophysiological approach is potentially informative, especially when studying theoretical issues regarding processes underlying social behavior. Research on yet another physiological response system, electrbmyographic activity recorded over the muscles of facial expression, is discussed for purposes of illustration. It is concluded that research has not and is not likely to demonstrate invariant psycho‐physiological links nor has it revealed so little about social processes and behavior that physiological responses and systems can be disregarded. An alternative conception of the psychophysiological enterprise is outlined.