CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 84Consumer Packaging Perceptions and TrendsConsumer Behavior and Marketing InfluenceConsumer Market Behavior and Pricing

Packaging design as an implicit communicator: Effects on product quality inferences in the presence of explicit quality cues

Open access
van Ooijen, Iris, Fransen, Marieke L., Verlegh, Peeter W.J., Smit, Edith G.·2017·Food Quality and Preference
DOI 10.1016/j.foodqual.2017.06.007
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

In this work we examine the interactive effect of packaging design and explicit packaging cues on quality inferences. Although the effect of explicit cues on product perception has been studied extensively, systematic research on this topic is still in its infancy. Furthermore, it has never been investigated whether design cues and explicit cues interact with each other in eliciting product inferences. Gaining knowledge about these effects is important, because in real-life situations consumers are predominantly exposed to product packaging that contains both subtle and explicit cues. In this work we examine how value – a dimension of colour that is related to “darker” versus “lighter” colours – affects product inferences. Two studies demonstrate that consumers use value as a cue to make product quality related inferences. Furthermore, we examine how consumers make product quality interferences when packaging design cues are congruent and incongruent with explicit quality cues. Based on Cue Consistency Theory (Maheswaran & Chaiken, 1991; Miyazaki, Grewal, & Goodstein, 2005) and information diagnosticity, we predicted that packaging design cues only affect quality inferences when they are congruent with explicit cues. Contrary to Cue Consistency Theory, results indicate that overall, packaging design affects quality inferences independently from explicit attribute cues. They emphasize the communicative power of packaging design, and value in particular.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.foodqual.2017.06.007

Cites

49 of 49 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 51 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
van Ooijen, I., Fransen, M. L., Verlegh, P. W. J., & Smit, E. G.
Affiliations
Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam (NL)
ORCID
Venue
Food Quality and Preference
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-12
Volume
62
Pages
71-79
ISSN
0950-3293 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.foodqual.2017.06.007
OpenAlex
W2625737230
Cited by
84
References
51
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 1
FWCI
9.41
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Locations
  • Food Quality and Preference (publishedVersion)
  • UvA-DARE (University of Amsterdam) (publishedVersion)
  • VU Research Portal (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • Leiden Repository (Leiden University) (submittedVersion)
  • Radboud Repository (Radboud University) (submittedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
  • University of Twente Research Information (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › Consumer Packaging Perceptions and Trends
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › Consumer Behavior and Marketing Influence
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › Consumer Market Behavior and Pricing
Keywords
packaging design, color value, color cues, consumer perception

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review