“consumer perceptions of product packaging” journal of consumer marketing

8/18/2019 “Consumer perceptions of product packaging” Journal of Consumer Marketing

1/18

Journal of Consumer MarketingConsumer perceptions of product packagingOlga Ampuero Natalia Vila

Article information:

To cite this document:Olga Ampuero Natalia Vila, (2006),"Consumer perceptions of product packaging", Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 23 Ispp. 100 - 112Permanent link to this document:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/07363760610655032

Downloaded on: 01 April 2016, At: 06:33 (PT)

References: this document contains references to 30 other documents.

To copy this document: [email protected]

The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 37425 times since 2006*

Users who downloaded this artic le also downloaded:

(2006),"Impact of color on marketing", Management Decision, Vol. 44 Iss 6 pp. 783-789 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/00251740610673332

(1996),"Packaging, marketing, logistics and the environment: are there trade-offs?", International Journal of Physical Distribu& Logistics Management, Vol. 26 Iss 6 pp. 60-72 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/09600039610125206

(1999),"What we know about consumers’ color choices", Journal of Marketing Practice: Applied Marketing Science, Vol. 5 Isspp. 78-88 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/EUM0000000004565

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by All users group

For Authors

If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors serviceinformation about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visitwww.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.

About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com

Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of onlineproducts and additional customer resources and services.

Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethi(COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation.

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/07363760610655032


2/18

Consumer perceptions of product packagingOlga Ampuero

Department of Graphic Expression in Engineering, Polytechnic University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain, and

Natalia Vila

Department of Marketing, School of Economics, University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain

AbstractPurpose – This paper seeks to discuss the need to understand consumer perceptions in order to correctly design product packing and to achieve thedesired position in the minds of consumers.Design/methodology/approach – Data collection was divided into two phases. The first, (based on designers’ opinions), to determine the keygraphic variables in the design of packaging. The second, (based on consumers’ opinions), to associate each packaging with a positioning strategy. Theseven product-positioning strategies selected were represented from the consumers’ standpoint using multidimensional scaling. Four maps wereobtained related to: alternative packaging colours; alternative packaging typography; alternative packaging graphical forms; alternative packagingimagesFindings – Each positioning strategy appears associated with particular packaging dimensions.Research limitations/implications – Consumers have exhibited harmonious perceptions towards products-packaging strategies, so one canconclude that a general feeling as to what a particular packaging exactly means exists. So the general opinion should guide packaging designers toappropriately meet consumers’ expectations.

Originality/value – A range of simulated packaging was prepared for the 46 consumers that took part in the two-phase experiment: One of the sevenpositioning strategies was explained. For example: “Product ‘A’ is positioned as reasonably priced. People say the price is OK”; Case to be solved: “Fromthis selection, choose the packaging that seems most suitable for product ‘A’, taking its characteristics into account”. The simulated packagingalternatives were shown and the subject chose the options that seemed most suitable (colour, typography, forms and images). The sequence wasrepeated for the remaining six positioning typologies.

Keywords Product positioning, Packaging, Perception, Presentation graphics, Consumer behaviour

Paper type Research paper

An executive summary for managers and executive

readers can be found at the end of this article.

IntroductionThe term positioning is a subjective and relative concept;

because product positioning is defined in the minds of

consumers taking into consideration the rest of the market

offers. Therefore, in order to obtain a particular position,

consumer product perceptions must be analysed in great

detail. The reason for this is that the perceptions of a given set

of consumers reflect and inspire at the same time the

company’s strategy for its products.

The relevance of the term “positioning” is due, in part, to

the relationship between a well-positioned product and the

success and growth of a company, just as many different

authors sustain (Ramsay, 1983; McAlexander et al., 1993).

So, given that success is traditionally associated with the

choice of an appropriate product positioning strategy, the firststep must be to correctly define a positioning strategy.

In this area, little work has been done to discover the role of

packaging in forming consumer perceptions of a product, and

consequently, in defining its positioning in consumers’ minds.

The reason for this lies in the fact that, traditionally, studies

have focussed on positioning through ephemeral messages

transmitted by the mass media, without taking into account

the permanent character of the tangible codes that packaging

transmits. Underwood (2003) states that the proliferation of

brands in the market and the varied range that a purchaser

finds at the point of sale, force efforts to achieve effective

differentiation to be increased. This is why traditional mass

media communication is being redirected to point of sale

promotions and communication.

To this end, this article will examine the possibilities that

packaging provides within the positioning strategy of tangible

products. So an experimentation-based empirical research

study has been carried out to relate each positioning strategy

to certain specific packaging elements (colour, typography,

shape, image). To summarise, this study has come about

because of the growing managerial recognition of the ability of

packaging to create differentiation and identity, above all inthe case of relatively homogenous perishable consumer goods.

Literature review

If we examine exactly what the term “positioning” is

understood to mean, there are studies (Maggard, 1976) that

sustain that its origins lie in an article by Al Ries and Jack

Trout published in the magazine Industrial Marketing in 1969.

This was followed by other articles published in the magazine

Advertising Age in 1 97 2 under the title “The age of

positioning”, which served to extend and disseminate the

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at

www.emeraldinsight.com/0736-3761.htm

Journal of Consumer Marketing

23/2 (2006) 100–112

q Emerald Group Publishing Limited [ISSN 0736-3761]

[DOI 10.1108/07363760610655032]

100


3/18

term. According to these authors, positioning has its origins in

product packaging (the concept was called product

positioning). This literally meant the shape of the product,

the size of the package and its price in comparison to the

competition. At that time, these authors announced the start

of a new age: “The age of positioning”, which recognised the

importance of the product and the image of the company, but,

above all, it underlined the need to achieve a position in themind of the consumer. Positioning starts with a product, but

it does not refer to the product; rather it refers to what can be

done to the mind of the probable clients or persons that are to

be influenced, that is to say, how to position the product in

their minds.

Once the positioning plan has been completed (and the

company knows how it wants to present itself to the market

with respect to its competition), the company implements a

plan of action through the construction of a suitable

marketing mix (Brooksbank, 1994). In this way, it can be

said that the positioning of a product induces its marketing

mix (pricing policy, place, products and promotion)

(Maggard, 1976; Aaker, 1996; Bigné and Vila, 2000). Later

on, marketing mix elements (product, price, distribution and

advertising) reach consumers and contribute to determining

the desired product positioning in the minds of consumers

(Maggard, 1976).

If we focus on “communication” activities, the sequence

should be the following: a positioning decision identifies the

product characteristics that should be stressed in the

marketing mix, particularly in its communication campaign.

In other words, positioning guides communication action

plans (Aaker, 1996). That is to say, the origin is a positioning

strategy which provides a base for several decisions to be

consequently followed.

If instead of centring on communication activities, we pay

attention to “product” decisions, we can see that it is

composed of several elements. One of these elements is

packaging, which is becoming an increasingly importantfactor for several reasons. These are summarised by

Underwood et al. (2001) and Underwood (2003). The first

reason that these authors propose is that, when faced with

reduced advertising budgets, brand building expenses are

reduced in the traditional mass media and communication

efforts are concentrated on sales promotions and on point of

sale communications. Second, for perishable goods there is an

increase in the purchasing decisions made directly in the shop

(according to the Henley Centre, 73 per cent of purchasing

decisions are made at the point of sale). Similarly, managers

are increasingly recognising that packaging can create

differentiation and identity, above all in relatively

homogenous perishable consumer goods. And finally, the

proliferation of the number of brands in the market and the

varied offer that purchasers find at the point of sale force there

to be an increase in efforts to achieve effective differentiation.

However, what exactly is the term “packaging” understood

to mean. In general terms, packaging is the container that is in

direct contact with product itself, which holds, protects,

preserves and identifies the product as well as facilitating

handling and commercialisation (Vidales Giovannetti, 1995).

More specifically, and following Vidales Giovannetti (1995),

there are three types of packaging. Primary packaging is in

direct contact with the product, such as perfume bottles.

Secondary packaging contains one or more primary packages

and serves to protect and identify them and to communicate

the qualities of the product. It is normally discarded when the

product is used or consumed. Following the previous

example, this would be the cardboard box that contains the

perfume bottle. Finally, tertiary packaging which contains the

two previous ones and its function is to distribute, unify and

protect products throughout the commercial chain. This

would be the cardboard box that contains several bottles.

In marketing literature, packaging is considered to formpart of the product and the brand. So, for example, for Evans

and Berman (1992) packaging is a product property or

characteristic, whereas for Olson and Jacoby (1972)

packaging is an extrinsic element of the product, that is to

say, it is attribute that is related to the product but that does

not form part of the physical product itself. Price and brand

are also extrinsic elements of the brand and according to

Underwood et al. (2001); these are the most important

extrinsic values when it comes to deciding what food products

to buy. Keller (1998) also considers packaging to be an

attribute that is not related to the product. For him it is one of

the five elements of the brand together with the name, the

logo and/or graphic symbol, the personality and the slogans.

Packaging is presented as part of the buying and consuming

process, but often it is not directly related to the ingredients

that are essential for the product to function (Underwood,

2003).

The view that Zeithaml (1972) sustains lies halfway

between these two positions. He considers packaging to be

both an extrinsic and intrinsic attribute (an intrinsic attribute

is one that cannot be changed without altering the physical

composition of the product). For example, if we refer to the

non-drip top, packaging is an intrinsic attribute; but if we

refer to the information that appears on the label, packaging is

an extrinsic attribute.

From the managerial point of view, in order for packaging

to suitably develop its functions, the structural and graphic

design of the packaging and even the optimum size of the

pack will be subject to market research undertaken by thecompany and the positioning that the company wants the

product to occupy in the market (Ivañez Gimeno, 2000). So,

packaging is, without doubt, specifically related to the

strategic decisions of the marketing mix (Underwood, 2003)

and, therefore, to positioning decisions.

From the consumer perspective, packaging also plays a

major role when products are purchased: packaging is crucial,

given that it is the first thing that the public sees before

making the final decision to buy (Vidales Giovannetti, 1995).

Th is f un ct io n h as i nc re as ed w it h t he a rr iva l an d

popularisation of self-service sales systems which have

caused packaging to move to the foreground in attracting

attention and causing a purchase. Prior to this, it had

remained behind the counter and only the sales attendant

came between the consumer and the product (Cervera

Fantoni, 2003). According to Sonsino (1990), self-service has

transferred the role of informing the customer from the sales

assistant to advertising and to packaging. This is why

packaging has been called the “silent salesman”, as it

informs us of the qualities and benefits that we are going to

obtain if we consume a certain product (Vidales Giovannetti,

1995). In the current self-service economy, packaging

provides manufacturers with the last opportunity to

persuade possible buyers before brand selection (McDaniel

and Baker, 1977). Therefore, all the packaging elements,

including texts, colours, structure, images and people/

Consumer perceptions of product packaging

Olga Ampuero and Natalia Vila


Volume 23 · Number 2 · 2006 · 100–112

101


4/18

personalities have to be combined to provide the consumer

with visual sales negotiation when purchasing and using the

product (McNeal and Ji, 2003). This becomes even more

crucial when the data contributed by Clive Nancarrow et al.

(1998) is taken into consideration: nine out of ten purchasers,

at least occasionally, buy on impulse (Welles, 1986) and

unplanned food shopping articles can account for up to 51

per cent of purchases (Phillips and Bradshaw, 1993).Behaeghel (1991) and Peters (1994) go a step further. They

consider that packaging could be the most important

communication medium for the following reasons:. it reaches almost all buyers in the category;. it is present at the crucial moment when the decision to

buy is made; and. buyers are actively involved with packaging as they

examine it to obtain the information they need.

In this situation, it is essential to communicate the right brand

and product values on packaging and to achieve a suitable

aesthetic and visual level (Nancarrow et al., 1998).

Similarly, McNeal and Ji (2003) underline that the

peculiarity of packaging as a marketing element lies in the

fact that it often accompanies the use or consumption of products and, therefore, the possibility of transmitting brand

values and product characteristics increases. With regard to

this aspect, Deasy (2000) points out that the characteristics of

a product – its positioning – are permanently transmitted

over seven stages:

(1) point of sale;

(2) transporting the product home;

(3) home storage;

(4) opening;

(5) serving the product for consumption;

(6) reclosing or putting away; and

(7) disposal.

Underwood (2003) points out that, unlike the transmission of

positioning though advertising, packaging allows positioningto be transferred live. As it accompanies products, packaging

lives in the home and potentially becomes an intimate part of

the consumer’s life constituting a type of live experience

between the consumer and the brand (Lindsay, 1997).

With regard to the main components of packaging, many

different points of view have been expressed (Sonsino, 1990;

Vidales Giovannetti, 1995; Hine, 1995; Ivañez Gimeno,

1995; Underwood et al., 2001; Cervera Fantoni, 2003).

Generally speaking, a distinction is made between two blocks

of components:

(1) graphic components: colour packaging, typography, the

graphical shapes used and the images introduced; and

(2) structural components: shape, size of the containers and

the materials used to manufacture them.

Research aims

As we have already stated, packaging plays a major role in

communicating brand personality by means of several

structural and graphic elements. So, this article aims to

discover how consumer perceptions vary according to product

packaging strategies. To do this, the role that packaging plays

in positioning strategy will be studied.

The proposal recently developed by Blankson and Kalafatis

(2001) has been selected, because it is based on consumer

perceptions. However, of the eight positions strategies defined

by these two authors, the second option “extraordinary

service” has been eliminated as it refers to the particular case

of service positioning, in which packaging does not play a

significant part. The seven remaining positioning strategies

have been studied in depth to see what kind of packaging best

represents them:

(1) positioning based on status, for the upper classes;

(2) positioning based on accessibility/economic price;(3) positioning based on safety;

(4) positioning based on elegance/sobriety;

(5) positioning based on the country of origin/patriotism;

(6) positioning based on excellence/high price; and

(7) positioning based on noble principles/for the middle

classes.

Of all the packaging components, this research is only

focussed on the elements whose definition corresponds to

graphic design (colour, typography, graphic shapes and

images), leaving the other structural elements that are

related to industrial design or engineering attributes (size,

shape, closing systems, manufacturing materials, formats. . .)

for subsequent research studies. So, the graphic elements tobe studied are the four that are reflected in the literature:

colour, typography, shapes and images. Therefore, if we relate

the positioning strategies and the graphic elements to the

studies, the following hypothesis can be proposed:

H1. Consumers’ perceptions towards products will vary

according to the packaging strategies defined for these

products.

Methodology

In order to achieve these objectives, data collection was

divided into two phases: the first, aimed at determining thekey graphic variables in the design of packaging; and the

second, aimed at associating packaging with positioning

strategies.

Phase 1: determination of the key elements of packaging

(colour, typography, shapes, and images)

In the first phase, eight interviews were conducted with

experts in packaging design. The objective was to determine

the most important graphic variables in the use of:

(1) colour;

(2) typography;

(3) shapes; and

(4) images.

In order to have a complete vision of the alternatives that can

be used w ith these f our com ponents, interview ee

heterogeneity was sought. The profile of the eight designers is:. Gender : Women – 62 per cent; Men – 38 per cent.. Age: 20-30 – 37 per cent; 30-40 – 38 per cent; 40-50 –

25 per cent.. Education: Primary education – 13 per cent; Higher

studies – 87 per cent.

As a result of this first phase, several alternatives were selected

for each of the four key variables.




Volume 23 · Number 2 · 2006 · 100–112

102


5/18

Phase 2: association of the key elements to the different

positioning strategies

A dossier showing a range of simulated packaging was

prepared for the 46 consumer that agreed to participate in our

experiment. The profile of the 46 consumers is:. Gender: Women – 57 per cent; Men – 43 per cent.. Age: 20-30 – 85 per cent; 30-40 – 15 per cent..

Education: Primary education – 7 per cent; Higher studies – 93 per cent.

This packaging represented each one of the four selected

graphic variables (colour, typography, shape and image) in the

different alternatives obtained in the previous qualitative

phase. So, for example, for the “colour” graphic element six

prototypes were prepared. In the first, related to the

“brightness” variable, two packaging alternatives were

presented: one in a dark colour (less brightness) and the

other in a light colour (more brightness). In the second,

related to the “saturation” variable, two packaging

alternatives were presented: one with a saturated or bright

colour and the other with a non-saturated or dull colour. In

the third prototype, relating to the “temperature” variable

packaging in warm colours (red, orange and yellow) andpackaging with cold colours (green and blue) were shown.

Finally, for the variable “shade”, packaging in three types of

colours was presented:

(1) black/white;

(2) blue/green; and

(3) yellow/orange/red.

These simulations were repeated for the other three graphic

variables (typography, shape and image) (Figure 1). The

complete prototype dossier was shown to the interviewees and

they were asked to relate the positioning strategies proposed

by Blankson and Kalafatis (2001) to the graphic variables that

best represented them. This procedure was done with a

sample of 46 consumers. The experiment was done according

to the following three-stage sequence:

(1) One of the positioning strategies presented by Blankson

and Kalafatis (2001) was explained. For example:

“Product ‘A’ is positioned as reasonably and affordably

priced. People say the price is OK”.

(2) The following is used to present the case to be solved:

“From this selection, choose the packaging that seems

most suitable for product ‘A’, taking its characteristics

into account”. The simulated packaging alternatives

(Figure 1) were shown and the subject chose the one that

seemed most suitable. The sequence was repeated for

the reaming six positioning typologies.

(3) Finally, the number of times that each graphic variable

was associated to each positioning strategy was

calculated.

The defining graphic variables for each strategy were obtained

by frequency counting.

Statistical techniques

The seven product positioning strategies have been

represented from the consumers’ standpoint. For this

purpose, multidimensional scaling has been applied. The

idea is that the packaging attributes that are situated close to a

particular positioning strategy on a perceptual map, correctly

represent this positioning strategy. Four maps (Figures 2–5)

have been obtained with multidimensional scaling based on

the data obtained related to:

(1) alternative packaging colours;

(2) alternative packaging typography;

(3) alternative packaging graphical forms; and

(4) alternative packaging images

Results

As far as obtaining the maps is concerned, SPSS software

ASCAL aggregated scaling was used[1]. In general, we can

state that the adjustment indices used to measure to what

extent these maps reflect the perceptions of the subjects

questioned (S-Stress, Stress and RSQ) are reasonably good.

The S-Stress and Stress take values close to zero, which

means that the perceptions are reflected accurately. The RSQ,

however, are close to 1, which means that the variability

explained by the model is almost 100 per cent. On our maps,

the indices obtained from the consumer information are

outstanding. This means that consumer perceptions regarding

the seven product positioning strategies with respect to the

different packaging variables analysed are reflected on themaps.

With respect to the first graphical dimension analysed,

“packaging colour”, the four quadrants of map 1 (Figure 2)

show four groups of positioning strategies with different

characteristics (Table I):

(1) Products directed to the upper classes, high price products and

elegant . The packaging of these three positioning

strategies are highly associated with cold (10) and dark

(1) colours, mainly black (14) and not to yellow, orange

and red colours (25).

(2) Reasonably priced, accessible products. On the contrary, the

packaging of this strategy is associated with light colours

(2), mainly white (13).

(3) Patriotic products and products based on guarantees. Neither

of these two strategies was clearly associated with any of the graphic design variables. They were associated with

the options “none” and “any”: any temperature (11), no

shade 1 (16), no brightness (4) no temperature (12), no

saturation (8), no shade 2 (20). However, there was a

slight association with the colour red, maybe because of

its presence on the Spanish flag and thus related to the

idea of “patriotism”.

(4) Non-selective products. The packaging of this strategy is

not well defined. It appears to be associated to both light

colours and dark colours (3), both saturated and non-

saturated colours (7) any of the yellow, orange and red

shades (24) any of the green and blue shades (19) and

any of the black and white tones (15). This strategy,

then, has no clearly defined colour, although it isassociated to warm colours (9).

With respect to the second graphical dimension analysed,

“packaging typographies”, the four quadrants of map 2

(Figure 3) show four groups of positioning strategies with

different characteristics (Table II):

(1) Elegant products. This type of product is associated with

bold letters (30), expanded characters (34), upper case

(38) large (42) and Roman letters (26).

(2) Products directed to the upper classes and high price products.

The packaging of both positioning strategies is highly

associated with any weight (32), any width (36), any




Volume 23 · Number 2 · 2006 · 100–112

103


6/18

Figure 1




Volume 23 · Number 2 · 2006 · 100–112

104

http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showImage?doi=10.1108/07363760610655032&iName=master.img-000.jpg&w=388&h=652


7/18

shape (40) and any type family (49). So, both strategies

are “Any typography associated”

(3) Accessible products. The lettering of this strategy is

associated with serif (47) and sans serif (46).

(4) Products based on guarantees, patriotic products and non-

selective products. The packaging of these strategies has

not been associated with weight (33), width (37), shape

(41) and type family (50). So, theses strategies do have

not a defined typography.

With respect to the third graphical dimension analysed,

“packaging graphic form”, the four quadrants of map 3

(Figure 4) show four groups of positioning strategies with

different characteristics (Table III):

(1) Upper class products and elegant products. The packaging

of both strategies is mainly associated with the “none”

option in five cases: straight line (55), line shape (65),

type of figures (73), elements (69) and composition

(77).

Figure 2 Packaging colour in product positioning

Figure 3 Packaging typography in product positioning




Volume 23 · Number 2 · 2006 · 100–112

105

http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showImage?doi=10.1108/07363760610655032&iName=master.img-002.jpg&w=377&h=245http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showImage?doi=10.1108/07363760610655032&iName=master.img-001.jpg&w=376&h=230


8/18

(2) Accessible products. However, the packaging of this

strategy is associated with “any graphic form”: any

straight line (vertical, horizontal, oblique) (54), any line

shape (straight, curved, broken) (64), any type of figures

(circles, squares, triangles) (72), any amount of elements

(single, several) (68) and any composition (symmetrical,

asymmetrical) (76).

(3) Products based on guarantees, patriotic products and high

price products. The packaging of these strategies has been

associated to straight lines (61), vertical lines (51),

straight outlines (70) symmetrical compositions (75) and

single elements (66).

(4) Non-selective products. Conversely, the packaging of this

strategy is associated with horizontallines (52) andoblique

Figure 4 Packaging graphic form in product positioning

Figure 5 Packaging image differences among positioning strategies




Volume 23 · Number 2 · 2006 · 100–112

106

http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showImage?doi=10.1108/07363760610655032&iName=master.img-004.jpg&w=351&h=255http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showImage?doi=10.1108/07363760610655032&iName=master.img-003.jpg&w=366&h=244


9/18

lines (53), with circles (56), curved lines (62), wavy

outlines (71), asymmetrical compositions (74) and several

elements (67).

With respect to the fourth graphical dimension analysed,

“packaging images”, the four quadrants of map 4 (Figure 5)

show four groups of positioning strategies with different

characteristics (Table IV):

(1) High price products, elegant products and patriotic products.

The packaging of these strategies is not related to any of

the image options: photographs and illustrations (81)

and images of the product or people (85).

(2) Non-selective products. Conversely, the packaging of this

strategy is associated with both illustrations and

photographs (80).

(3) Products based on guarantees and upper class products. The

packaging of both strategies has been associated with

photographs (78) and with images of the product (82).

(4) Accessible products. In contrast to the previous strategy,

the packaging of this strategy has been associated with

illustrations (78) with people (83).

In summary, each positioning strategy is associated with

particular packaging dimensions as follows:(1) Top category positioning, prestige status, directed to the upper

classes:. Colour: Cold, Dark, Black.. Typography: Any.. Graphic form: None.. Image: Picture, Product.

(2) Accessible product, reasonable price positioning:. Colour: Light, White.. Typography: Serif, Sans serif.. Graphic form: Any.. Image: Illustration, Person.

Table I Packaging colour in product positioning

Top category

positioning, prestige

status, directed to the

upper classes

Accessible

product,

reasonable

price

positioning

Positioning

based on

durability,

guarantee and

safety

Positioning based

on refined, sober

and elegant

aesthetics

Positioning

based on

country of

origin,

patriotism

Positioning

based on

excellence,

high price,

variety

Non-selective

positioning, for the

middle classes, based

on noble principles

Brightness X2590 :

047 **

1 Dark 60.9 21.7 56.5 52.2 50 54.3 19.6

2 Light 13 52.2 17.4 23.9 10.9 6.5 39.1

3 Any 4.3 13 6.5 19.6 13 28.3

4 None 21.7 13 19.6 23.9 19.6 26.1 13

Saturation X2537 :886 ** 5 Saturated 39.1 34.8 41.3 23.9 39.1 45.7 21.7

6 Not

saturated 32.6 23.9 21.7 28.3 19.6 19.6 32.6

7 Any 8.7 23.9 17.4 6.5 19.6 10.9 34.8

8 None 19.6 17.4 19.6 41.3 21.7 23.9 10.9

Temperature X2546 :209 ** 9 Warm 21.7 32.6 10.9 6.5 26.1 19.6 26.1

10 Cold 28.3 26.1 32.6 28.3 6.5 17.4 28.3

11 Any 15.2 8.7 10.9 8.7 19.6 17.4 23.9

12 None 34.8 32.6 45.7 56.5 47.8 45.7 21.7

Shade 1 X2546 :209 ** 13 White 23.9 45.7 41.3 13 30.4 23.9 45.7

14 Black 50 17.4 34.8 52.2 26.1 41.3 6.5

15 Any 13 15.2 17.4 23.9 23.9 21.7 28.3

16 None 13 21.7 6.5 10.9 19.6 13 19.6

Shade 2 X2561:004 ** 17 Green 8.7 23.9 15.2 6.5 15.2 6.5 23.9

18 Blue 39.1 30.4 37 30.4 19.6 28.3 28.3

19 Any 8.7 30.4 19.6 6.5 26.1 8.7 30.4

20 None 43.5 15.2 28.3 56.5 39.1 56.5 17.4

Shade 3 X2599 :689 ** 21 Yellow 10.9 23.9 17.4 4.3 10.9 8.7 13

22 Orange 26.1 32.6 8.7 28.3 21.7 17.4 37

23 Red 32.6 10.9 23.9 19.6 23.9 37 4.3

24 Any 4.3 28.3 15.2 6.5 21.7 8.7 30.4

25 None 26.1 4.3 34.8 41.3 21.7 28.3 15.2

Note: Each cell is a relative frequency (how many persons have associated each property with each strategy in relative terms)




Volume 23 · Number 2 · 2006 · 100–112

107


10/18

(3) Positioning based on durability, guarantee and safety:. Colour: Red.. Typography: None.. Graphic form: Straight line, Vertical, Straight outline,

Symmetrical, One element.. Image: Picture, Product.

(4) Positioning based on refined, sober and elegant aesthetics:. Colour: Cold, Dark, Black.. Typography: Bold, Expanded, Upper case, Large,

Roman.. Graphic form: None.. Image: None.

(5) Positioning based on country of origin, patriotism:. Colour: Red.. Typography: None.. Graphic form: Straight line, Vertical, Straight outline,

Symmetrical, One element.. Image: None.

(6) Positioning based on excellence, high price, variety:. Colour: Cold, Dark, Black.. Typography: Any.. Graphic form: Straight line, Vertical, Straight outline,

Symmetrical, One element.. Image: None.

(7) Non-selective positioning, for the middle classes, based onnoble principles:. Colour: Any.. Typography: None.. Graphic form: Horizontal, Oblique, Circle, Curve,

Wavy outline, Asymmetrical, Several elements.. Image: Any.

Conclusions

Our results give rise to the following four conclusions. First,

with respect to packaging colour, it seems that products that

Table II Packaging typography in product positioning

Top category



upper classes

Accessible

product,

reasonable

price

positioning

Positioning

based on

durability,

guarantee and

safety

Positioning based

on refined, sober

and elegant

aesthetics

Positioning

based on

country of

origin,

patriotism

Positioning

based on

excellence,

high price,

variety

Non-selective



on noble principles

Slope X2552 :

943 **

26 Roman 34.8 45.7 50 17.4 34.8 34.8 37

27 Italic 56.5 28.3 28.3 63 34.8 41.3 21.7

28 Any 10.9 15.2 10.9 19.6 10.9 26.1

29 None 8.7 15.2 6.5 8.7 10.9 13 15.2

Weight X2599 :689 ** 30 Bold 28.3 23.9 23.9 6.5 28.3 26.1 15.2

31 Light 45.7 45.7 45.7 56.5 34.8 45.7 41.3

32 Any 23.9 23.9 4.3 23.9 6.5 28.3

33 None 26.1 6.5 6.5 32.6 13 21.7 15.2

Width X2558 :133 ** 34 Expanded 26.1 23.9 41.3 21.7 43.5 34.8 26.1

35 Condensed 50 41.3 26.1 32.6 21.7 32.6 37

36 Any 6.5 26.1 21.7 2.2 17.4 6.5 28.3

37 None 17.4 8.7 10.90 43.50 17.40 26.10 8.70

Shape X2543 :396 ** 38 Upper case 19.6 32.67 41.3 23.9 39.1 39.1 28.3

39 Lower case 60.9 39.1 32.6 37 26.1 34.8 37

40 Any 2.2 21.7 15.2 6.5 23.9 10.9 26.1

41 None 17.4 6.5 10.9 32.6 10.9 15.2 8.7

Size X2528 :751

42 Large 34.8 41.3 41.3 26.1 50 34.8 43.5

43 Small 30.4 23.9 23.9 39.1 17.4 21.7 13

44 Any 4.3 6.5 6.5 4.3 10.9 6.5 15.2

45 None 30.4 28.3 28.3 30.4 21.7 37 28.3

Type family X2578 :821** 46 Sans serif 17.4 13 28.3 19.6 32.6 19.6 15.2

47 Serif 45.7 23.9 50 34.8 30.4 41.3 17.4

48 Script 10.9 43.5 4.3 23.9 15.2 10.9 28.3

49 Any 13 13 2.2 13 10.9 26.1

50 None 26.1 6.5 4.3 19.6 8.7 17.4 13.0





Volume 23 · Number 2 · 2006 · 100–112

108


11/18

are directed to the upper classes, with a high price and based

on elegant and refined aesthetics require cold, dark coloured

(mainly black) packaging. In contrast, accessible products

that are directed to price sensitive consumers required light(mainly white) coloured packaging. Safe and guaranteed

products and patriotic products are associated with red

packaging, maybe because the colour of the national flag of

the consumers interviewed is essentially red.

Second, with respect to packaging typography, our results

show that packaging for elegant products usually presents

bold, large, roman, upper case letters with expanded

characters. In contrast, accessible products of reasonable

price are associated with serif and sans serif typographies.

Third, with respect to graphic forms, we can see that non-

selective products, directed to the middle classes, use

horizontal and oblique straight lines, circles, curves, wavy

outlines, asymmetrical compositions and several elements. In

contrast, high price products appear to be associated with

vertical straight lines, squares, straight outlines, andsymmetrical composition with one single element.

Fourth, with respect to packaging illustrations, safe

guaranteed products and upper classes products are

associated with pictures showing the product. In contrast,

accessible products directed to price sensitive consumers are

associated with illustrations showing people.

In sum, each positioning strategy seems to be associated to

some particular packaging graphical elements. Theses

elements (colour, typography, form and illustration) are

combined in different ways to transmit the desired perception

in consumers’ minds.

Table III Packaging graphic form in product positioning

Top category


status, directed to

the upper classes

Accessible

product,

reasonable

price

positioning

Positioning

based on

durability,

guarantee and

safety

Positioning

based on refined,

sober and

elegant

aesthetics

Positioning

based on

country of

origin,

patriotism

Positioning

based on

excellence,

high price,

variety

Non-selective



on noble principles

Straight line direction X2557 :

685 **

51 Vertical 30.4 15.2 17.4 26.1 17.4 15.2 8.7

52 Horizontal 28.3 34.8 39.1 10.9 23.9 19.6 26.1

53 Oblique 21.7 19.6 6.5 21.7 8.7 26.1 23.9

54 Any 10.9 10.9 15.2 8.7 17.4 6.5 28.3

55 None 8.7 21.7 32.6 32.6 32.6 13

Geometric figures X2588 :962 ** 56 Circle 19.6 37 13 17.4 13 10.9 15.2

57 Square 30.4 41.3 23.9 17.4 15.2 26.1 6.5

58 Triangle 4.3 2.2 8.7 17.4 8.7 13 19.6

59 Any 6.5 19.6 4.3 4.3 23.9 6.5 26.1

60 None 39.1 50 39.1 43.5 32.6

Line shape X2564 :546 ** 61 Straight 28.3 21.7 28.3 32.6 30.4 21.7 8.7

62 Curve 39.1 21.7 10.9 19.6 17.4 21.7 21.7

63 Broken 6.5 15.2 2.2 8.7 4.3 6.5 17.4

64 Any 13 6.5 15.2 10.9 21.7

65 None 26.1 28.3 52.2 39.1 32.6 39.1 30.4

Number of elements X2568 :685 ** 66 One 47.8 15.2 37 32.6 28.3 30.4 19.6

67 Several 21.7 47.8 15.2 23.9 19.6 19.6 45.7

68 Any 2.2 17.4 6.5 8.7 13 10.9 15.2

69 None 28.3 19.6 41.3 34.8 39.1 39.1 19.6

Type of figures X2535 :119 ** 70 Straight

outline 15.2 15.2 21.7 15.2 8.7 19.6 10.9

71 Wavy outline 34.8 32.6 13 19.6 19.6 23.9 28.3

72 Any 10.9 28.3 8.7 10.9 17.4 6.5 19.6

73 None 39.1 23.9 56.5 54.3 54.3 50 41.3

Composition X2539 :965 ** 74 Asymmetrical 37 19.6 6.5 19.6 10.9 23.9 10.9

75 Symmetrical 41.3 37 52.2 30.4 39.1 34.8 41.3

76 Any 4.3 26.1 15.2 10.9 21.7 13 23.9

77 None 17.4 17.4 26.1 39.1 28.3 28.3 23.9





Volume 23 · Number 2 · 2006 · 100–112

109


12/18

Managerial implicationsFrom what has been said, it is possible to make the following

basic implications for management.

First, the definition of a product’s competitive positioning is

a relative concept. Positioning strategy becomes meaningful

when seen in comparative terms. Thus, good or poor

performance is not sufficient; you have to perform better

than those competitors whose competitive capacity is strong

enough to influence strategic decision-taking. This enables

the company to analyse competition product strategies in

greater detail and in a more objective way than relying merely

on intuition. In this sense, packaging design has been showed

as a useful tool to achieve positioning objectives.

Second, how do we go about singling out more important

product competitors in order to focus company attention on

them? A cognitive approach is a positive departure. In this

line, perceptions are recommended on the grounds that the

way a consumer sees competitive offerings will affect his

buying decisions. So, opinions regarding alternative packaging

formulas should be proved to anticipate the opinions that they

originate and the behaviours that consequently cause. For this

reason, once the firm has acted over the packaging to affect

perceptions, consumers will convert these perceptions in

attitudes, which will determine the final buying decision. We

support that packaging is, without doubt, specifically related

to the strategic decisions of the marketing mix and, therefore,

to positioning decisions and consumer behaviours.

Third, as has been shown, consumers have exhibited

harmonious perceptions towards products packagingstrategies, so we can conclude that a general feeling as to

what a particular packaging exactly means exists. In this

sense, the general opinion should guide packaging designers

to appropriately meet consumers’ expectations. So we

recommend taking into account the permanent character of

the tangible codes that packaging transmits, instead of just

focusing on positioning through ephemeral messages

transmitted by the mass media.

In sum, the proliferation of the number of brands in the

market and the varied offer that purchasers find at the point of

sale force there to be an increase in efforts to achieve effective

differentiation. In this scene, the power of the packing hasbeen demonstrated.

To this end, this article will examine the possibilities that

packaging provides within the positioning strategy of tangible

products. So an experimentation-based empirical research

study has been carried out to relate each positioning strategy

to certain specific packaging elements (colour, typography,

shape, image). To summarise, this study has come about

because of the growing managerial recognition of the ability of

packaging to create differentiation and identity, above all in

the case of relatively homogenous perishable consumer goods.

There are limitations which we should point out. The

perceptions were expressed for a given point in time, so that

dynamic analyses or previsions about how the positioning-

packaging associations may evolve in the future could not becarried out.

With regard to the future, we could suggest the possibility of

extending the analysis to different cultural backgrounds so as to

analyse changes in the positioning perception of one particular

packaging, in accordance with the area in which it is marketed.

It would also be interesting to study the cooperation/association

links between competitors in order to understand packaging

reformulations to attend several positioning strategies. Looking

ahead, it might be possible to extend the analysis to consider

different cultural scenarios in order to analyse changes in the

packaging of the same brand depending on the area where it is

marketed. Finally, the evolution of the relationships analysed

could be studiedover time in order to adda dynamic perspective

to the analyses carried out.

Note

1 Although it would have been possible to represent data

three-dimensionally, we decided to use two-dimensional

maps in order to facilitate the visual interpretation of the

results, as per relevant literature such as DeSarbo et al.

(1991), who are the precursors in the combined use of

techniques involving spatial representation and grouping.

Similarly, we have found that the use of more axes does

not substantially improve the adjustment indices of the

results obtained. (S-Stress, Stress y RSQ)

Table IV Packaging image differences among positioning strategies

Top category



upper classes

Accessible

product,

reasonable

price

positioning

Positioning

based on

durability,

guarantee and

safety

Positioning based

on refined, sober

and elegant

aesthetics

Positioning

based on

country of

origin,

patriotism

Positioning

based on

excellence,

high price,

variety

Non-selective



on noble principles

Image nature X25149 :

580 **

78 Picture 65.2 13 45.7 41.3 39.1 41.3 6.5

79 Illustration 13 67.4 15.2 15.2 13 10.9 54.3

80 Any 10.9 10.9 4.3 19.6 10.9 28.3

81 None 21.7 8.7 28.3 39.1 28.3 37 10.9

Image motive X2563 :989 ** 82 Product 37 30.4 37 34.8 45.7 41.3 13

83 Person 21.7 32.6 30.4 10.9 15.2 8.7 52.2

84 Any 10.9 23.9 17.4 6.5 13 10.9 19.6

85 None 30.4 13 15.2 47.8 26.1 39.1 15.2





Volume 23 · Number 2 · 2006 · 100–112

110


13/18

References

Aaker, D.A. (1996), Construir marcas poderosas, Gestión 2000,

Barcelona.

Behaeghel, J. (1991), Brand Packaging: The Permanent

Medium, Architecture Design and Technology Press,

London.

Bigne´

, E. and Vila, N. (2000), “Estrategia de empresa yposicionamiento de producto: un análisis comparado en la

industria del automóvil”, Economı́a Industrial , No. 332,

pp. 29-41.

Blankson, C. and Kalafatis, S.P. (2001), “The development of

a consumer/customer-derived generic typology of

positioning strategies”, Journal of Marketing Theory and

Practice, Vol. 9 No. 2, p. 36.

Brooksbank, R. (1994), “The anatomy of marketing

positioning strategy”, Marketing Intelligence & Planning ,

Vol. 12 No. 4, p. 10.

Cervera Fantoni, A.L. (2003), Envase y embalaje. La venta

silenciosa, ESIC, Madrid.

DeSarbo, W., Jedidi, K., Cool, K. and Schendel, D. (1991),

“Simultaneous multidimensional unfolding and cluster

analysis: an analysis of strategic groups”, Marketing

Letters, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 129-46.

Deasy, D. (2000), “Express brand personality – let your

package do the talking”, Brand Packaging Magazine, March/

April, available at: www.cheskin.com/p/ar.asp?mlid=7&arid

=26&art=1

Evans, J. and Berman, B. (1992), Marketing , Macmillan

Publishing Co, New York, NY.

Hine, T. (1995), The Total Package, Little, Brown & Co.,

Boston, MA.

Ivañez Gimeno, J.M. (1995), La gestió n del diseño en la

empresa, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.

Ivañez Gimeno, J.M. (2000), La gestió n del diseño en la

empresa, McGraw-Hill, Madrid.

Keller, K.L. (1998), Strategic Brand Management , Prentice-

Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.

Lindsay, D. (1997), “Shaped to sell: package innovation can

boost revenue, decrease cost and build brand”, Beverage

World , Vol. 116, pp. 91-2.

McAlexander, J., Becker, B. and Kaldenberg, D. (1993),

“Positioning health care services: Yellow Pages advertising

and dental practice performance”, Journal of Health Care

Marketing , No. 13, pp. 54-7.

McDaniel, C. and Baker, R.C. (1977), “Convenience food

packaging and the perception of product quality”, Journal of

Marketing , October, pp. 57-8.

McNeal, J.U. and Ji, M.F. (2003), “Children’s visual memory

of packaging”, Journal of Consumer Marketing , Vol. 20 No. 5,

pp. 400-27.Maggard, J.P. (1976), “Positioning revisited”, Journal of

Marketing , January, pp. 63-6.

Nancarrow, C., Wright, L.T. and Brace, I. (1998), “Gaining

competitive advantage from packaging and labelling in

marketing communications”, British Food Journal , Vol. 100

No. 2, pp. 110-18.

Olson, J.C. and Jacoby, J. (1972), “Cue utilization in the

quality perception process”, in Venkatesan, M. (Ed.),

Proceedings of the 3rd Annual Conference of the Association for

Consumer Research, Association for Consumer Research, Iowa

City, IA, pp. 167-79.

Peters, M. (1994), “Good packaging gets through to fickle

buyers”, Marketing , 20 January.

Phillips, H. and Bradshaw, R. (1993), “How customers

actually shop: customer interaction with the point of sale”,

The Journal of the Market Research Society, Vol. 35 No. 1.

Ramsay, B. (1983), “Brand efficiency: lessons from the

USA”, ADMAP , Vol. 19 No. 11, pp. 556-63.

Sonsino, S. (1990), Packaging. Diseño, materiales y tecnologı́a,Gustavo Gili, Barcelona.

Underwood, R.L. (2003), “The communicative power of

product packaging: creating brand identity via lived and

mediated experience”, Journal of Marketing Theory and

Practice, Winter, pp. 62-76.

Underwood, R.L., Klein, N.M. and Burke, R.R. (2001),

“Packaging communication: attentional effects of product

imagery”, Journal of Product & Brand Management , Vol. 10

No. 7, pp. 403-22.

Vidales Giovannetti, M.D. (1995), El mundo del envase.

Manual para el diseño y producció n de envases y embalajes,

Gustavo Gili, Mexico City, p. 90.

Welles, G. (1986), “We’re in the habit of impulsive buying”,

USA Today, 21 May, p. 1.

Zeithaml, V. (1972), “Consumer perceptions of price, quality,

and value: a means-end model and synthesis of evidence”,

Journal of Marketing , No. 52, pp. 2-22.

Further reading

Ries, A. and Trout, J. (1991), Posicionamiento, McGraw-Hill,

Madrid.

About the authors

Olga Ampuero is a researcher in the Department of Graphic

Expression in Engineering in the School of Design

Engineering at the Polytechnic University of Valencia. She

has developed several projects related to graphic design, visualidentities, multimedia design and packaging design.

Natalia Vila is a Lecturer in Marketing in the Department

of Marketing in the School of Economics at the University of

Valencia. She has carried out research on topics such as

competitive positioning, identification of strategic groups/

competitive groups and the application of multidimensional

scaling in marketing. Her research work has been published in

diverse refereed journals (i.e. Journal of Marketing

Management, Journal of Strategic Marketing, European Journal

of Innovation Management, Qualitative Market Research: An

International Journal, Journal of Euromarketing, The Marketing

Review and Spanish refereed journals). She has presented

papers at several conferences such as EMAC, AM and AMS.

Natalia Vila is the corresponding author and can be contacted

at: [email protected]

Executive summary and implications formanagers and executives

This summary has been provided to allow managers and executives

a rapid appreciation of the content of this article. Those with a

particular interest in the topic covered may then read the article in

toto to take advantage of the more comprehensive description of the

research undertaken and its results to get the full benefits of the

material present.




Volume 23 · Number 2 · 2006 · 100–112

111

http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showLinks?crossref=10.1080%2F10696679.2001.11501890http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showLinks?crossref=10.1080%2F10696679.2001.11501890http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showLinks?system=10.1108%2F02634509410060695http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showLinks?crossref=10.1007%2FBF00436033http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showLinks?crossref=10.1007%2FBF00436033http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showLinks?crossref=10.2307%2F1250234&isi=A1977DZ16800011http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showLinks?crossref=10.2307%2F1250234&isi=A1977DZ16800011http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showLinks?system=10.1108%2F07363760310489652http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showLinks?crossref=10.2307%2F1250678&isi=A1976BC26800010http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showLinks?crossref=10.2307%2F1250678&isi=A1976BC26800010http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showLinks?system=10.1108%2F00070709810204101http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showLinks?isi=A1993KM37000004http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showLinks?crossref=10.1080%2F10696679.2003.11501933http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showLinks?crossref=10.1080%2F10696679.2003.11501933http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showLinks?system=10.1108%2F10610420110410531http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showLinks?crossref=10.2307%2F1250234&isi=A1977DZ16800011http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showLinks?crossref=10.2307%2F1250234&isi=A1977DZ16800011http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showLinks?system=10.1108%2F10610420110410531http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showLinks?system=10.1108%2F02634509410060695http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showLinks?system=10.1108%2F00070709810204101http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showLinks?isi=A1993KM37000004http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showLinks?system=10.1108%2F07363760310489652http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showLinks?crossref=10.1080%2F10696679.2003.11501933http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showLinks?crossref=10.1080%2F10696679.2003.11501933http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showLinks?crossref=10.1080%2F10696679.2001.11501890http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showLinks?crossref=10.1080%2F10696679.2001.11501890http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showLinks?crossref=10.2307%2F1250678&isi=A1976BC26800010http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showLinks?crossref=10.2307%2F1250678&isi=A1976BC26800010http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showLinks?crossref=10.1007%2FBF00436033http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showLinks?crossref=10.1007%2FBF00436033


14/18

Product packaging and marketing

Marketers have become increasingly alert to the notion that

product packaging has a major role to play in differentiation

strategies, especially where largely uniform perishable goods

are concerned. The bulk of advertising has invariably been

executed through different media channels but reduced

budgets have forced many managers to shift the marketing

focus to point of sale communication and sales promotions.Almost three-quarters of purchase decisions relating to such

products are made at point of sale, making effective

differentiation therefore imperative in a product category

where consumers enjoy abundant choice. Furthermore, the

shift towards self-service has meant closer contact between

consumer and product, therefore increasing the importance of

advertising at the position that represents the last and perhaps

most important opportunity of influencing consumer choice.

Most products are positioned to intentionally target specific

consumer sectors and. diffusing messages via the media has

traditionally been regarded as the most effective way to

achieve the desired market position. However, such messages

are obviously transient by nature and there is growing

realization that the relative permanence of product packaging

and its immediacy to the purchase decision can prove a moreefficient means of ensuring successful positioning. It has also

been pointed out that while packaging remains in the

consumer’s hom e after purchase, it continues to

communicate brand messages.

How positioning is achieved

Ampuero and Vila argue that packaging is able to influence

consumer response to a product. They identified color,

typography, graphical forms and images as being the key

packaging variables that combine to influence perception that

the product is positioned to target a specific consumer group.

The premise is that the right combination of elements is

needed in order for the desired effect to be achieved. Based on

previous research, seven different product positioningstrategies were identified: status, value, safety, elegance,

country of origin, excellence and noble principles. The aim

was to discover if there is general agreement among

consumers as to which packaging combinations of the above

named variables relate to each product positioning strategy.

To test the theory, the authors carried out a study in which

46 Spanish consumers were exposed to a portfolio showing

various packaging combinations and asked to select the

combination they regarded as most suitable for each

positioning strategy. The frequency that each variable was

chosen was the determining factor. Prior contact with

packaging design experts determined the combinations that

were included in the portfolio.

The findings indicated that the respondents’ perceptions

were broadly in agreement with prior expectations establishedfrom consultation with the packaging experts. As a result, the

authors were able to draw several conclusions. For example,

products in cold, dark colored packaging were associated with

products that are high priced, elegant or aimed at the upper

classes. Elegant products also require bold, large, roman,

upper case fonts with expanded characters. At the other end

of the scale, it was determined that products aimed at the

price conscious shopper ideally come in white or other lightly

colored packaging containing illustrations of people and serif

or sans serif typographies. Packaging aimed at the upper

classes is associated with pictures that show the product itself.Among the other assumptions was that products based on

noble principles and aimed at the middle classes are packaged

using a variety of graphic forms that include circles, curves,

wavy outlines and different types of straight line.

Implications

The authors believe that the study provides significant

evidence of correlation between packaging design and

positioning perceptions because each positioning strategy

appears to be associated with precise graphical elements in

some or all of the variables. This conclusion is seen as

particularly significant in the light of belief that consumers

can both reflect and inspire a company’s strategies for

marketing its products.

In addition to achieving positioning objectives, it isadditionally concluded that package design as a marketing

tool can help to better inform about competitors’ product

strategies. The importance here is also emphasized, since

analysts maintain that the success of positioning can only be

realistically calculated in relative terms.

Indeed, Ampuero and Vila suggest that the findings can

enable organizations to effectively scrutinize competitor

performance. It is recommended that marketers closely

monitor alternative packaging design that might be used by

a competitor. The aim here is to measure consumer reaction

and the impact on purchase decisions so that counter

strategies can be devised.

The evidence indicates a general agreement as to how

specific packaging designs will be interpreted. In view of this,the authors recommend a greater focus on product packaging

as a marketing weapon. They do, however, point out some

important limitations. For instance, this study was carried out

at a given time, so there is no assessment of if and how

perceptions of packaging design might transform in the

future. Likewise, there is no analysis of any historical

development of the concept. The authors also emphasize

the significant point that perceptions associated to product

packaging may well be culture specific and therefore limit the

conclusions that can be drawn. In respect of this, it is

suggested that research into how product packaging is

perceived within various cultural frameworks would be

enlightening, not least as it could reveal that products may

need to be packaged differently to achieve the same position

within different markets.

(A pré cis of the article “Consumer perceptions of product

packaging”. Supplied by Marketing Consultants for Emerald.)




Volume 23 · Number 2 · 2006 · 100–112

112

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: [email protected]

Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints


15/18

This article has been cited by:

1. Carlos Velasco, Andy T. Woods, Olivia Petit, Adrian D. Cheok, Charles Spence. 2016. Crossmodal correspondences betweentaste and shape, and their implications for product packaging: A review. Food Quality and Preference 52, 17-26. [CrossRef ]

2. Shuo-Fang Liu, Jui-Hung Cheng, Yann-Long Lee, Feng-Ru Gau. 2016. A case study on FMEA-based quality improvement of packaging designs in the TFT-LCD industr y. Total Q uality Mana geme nt & Business Excellence 27, 413-431. [CrossRef ]

3. Rupert Andrew Hurley, Rachel Randall, Liam O'Hara, Charles Tonkin, Julie C. Rice. 2016. Color harmonies in packaging.

Color Research & Application n/a-n/a. [CrossRef ]4. Nicholas Ford, Paul Trott, Christopher Simms. 2016. Exploring the impact of packaging interactions on quality of life among

older consumers. Journal of Marketing Management 32, 275-312. [CrossRef ]5. Katherine White, Lily Lin, Darren W. Dahl, Robin J. B. Ritchie. 2016. When Do Consumers Avoid Imperfections? Superficial

Packaging Damage as a Contamination Cue. Journal of Marketing Research 53, 110-123. [CrossRef ]6. Toni Ryynänen Economics and Management, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland Markus Joutsela Visual Communication

Design, Aalto University School of Arts, Design and Architecture, Helsinki, Finland Visa Heinonen Economics and Management,Univeristy of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland . 2016. “My Grandfather kept one of these tins on top of the bookshelf”. Qualitative Market Researc h: An Inte rnational Journal 19:1, 4-26. [ Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

7. Agnieszka Izabela Baruk Systems of Management and Innovation Department , Organization and Management Faculty,Lodz University of Technology, Lodz, Poland AND Management and Marketing Department, Agrobioengineering Faculty,

University of Life Sciences, Lublin, Poland Anna Iwanicka Management and Marketing Department, Agrobioengineering Faculty, University of Life Sciences, Lublin, Poland . 2016. The effect of age, gender and level of education on the consumer’sexpectations towards dairy product packaging. British Food Journal 118:1, 100-118. [ Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

8. Mohsen Rasouli Valajoozi Industrial Design, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran Nosrat Ollah Zangi Business management,Islamic Azad University of Ali Abad-E-Katul, Ali Abad, Iran . 2016. A review on visual criteria of pure milk packaging for parentsand their children (case study: Tehran, Iran). British Food Journal 118:1, 83-99. [ Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

9. Seung Hwan (Mark) Lee, K. Douglas Hoffman. 2016. Wrap-Attack Pack: Product Packaging Exercise. Marketing EducationReview 26, 14-19. [CrossRef ]

10. Helena Lindh, Annika Olsson, Helen Williams. 2016. Consumer Perceptions of Food Packaging: Contributing to orCounteracting Environmentally Sustainable Development?. Packaging Technology and Science 29:10.1002/pts.v29.1, 3-23.[CrossRef ]

11. Krisztina R. Dörnyei, Tamás Gyulavári. 2016. Why do not you read the label? - an integrated framework of consumer label

information search. International Journal of Consumer Studies 40:10.1111/ijcs.2016.40.issue-1, 92-100. [CrossRef ]12. Helena Lindh, Helen Williams, Annika Olsson, Fredrik Wikström. 2016. Elucidating the Indirect Contributions of Packaging

to Sustainable Development: A Terminology of Packaging Functions and Features. Packaging Technolo gy and Science n/a-n/a.[CrossRef ]

13. Ana M. Arboleda, Carlos Arce-Lopera. 2015. Quantitative analysis of product categorization in soft drinks using bottlesilhouettes. Food Quality and Preference 45, 1-10. [CrossRef ]

14. Hanna Berg Center for Consumer Marketing, Stockholm School of Economics, Stockholm, Sweden Magnus Söderlund Centerfor Consumer Marketing, Stockholm School of Economics, Stockholm, Sweden Annika Lindström Center for Retailing,Stockholm School of Economics, Stockholm, Sweden AND Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden . 2015. Spreading joy:examining the effects of smiling models on consumer joy and attitudes. Journal of Consumer Marketing 32:6, 459-469. [ Abstract][Full Text] [PDF]

15. Daniele Lama, Gabriele Pizzi. 2015. L'effetto del packaging sulle percezioni di qualità del prodotto nel mercato vinicolo.

MERCATI E COMPETITIVITÀ 61-82. [CrossRef ]16. Mahsa-Sadat Taghavi Department of Business Management, Faculty of Management and Economics, Science and Research

Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran. Alireza Seyedsalehi Department of Executive Management, Qazvin Branch, Islamic Azad University, Qazvin, Iran. . 2015. The effect of packaging and brand on children’s and parents’ purchasing decisions and themoderating role of pester power. British Food Journal 117:8, 2017-2038. [ Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

17. Huda Khan School of Marketing, University of South Australia, Adelaide, Australia Richard Lee School of Marketing, University of South Australia, Adelaide, Australia Larry Lockshin School of Marketing, University of South Australia, Adelaide, Australia .2015. Localising the packaging of foreign food brands: a case of Muslim consumers in Pakistan. Journal of Product & Brand Management 24:4, 386-398. [ Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JPBM-08-2014-0694http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JPBM-08-2014-0694http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/full/10.1108/JPBM-08-2014-0694http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/pdfplus/10.1108/JPBM-08-2014-0694http://dx.doi.org/10.3280/MC2015-003004http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/full/10.1108/JCM-03-2015-1356http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/pdfplus/10.1108/JCM-03-2015-1356http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2015.04.006http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2015.04.006http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2015.04.006http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2015.04.006http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pts.2197http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pts.2184http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10528008.2015.1091664http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-12-2014-0425http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/full/10.1108/BFJ-12-2014-0425http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/pdfplus/10.1108/BFJ-12-2014-0425http://dx.doi.org/10.1509/jmr.12.0388http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0267257X.2015.1123758http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0267257X.2015.1123758http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0267257X.2015.1123758http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/col.22049http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/pdfplus/10.1108/JPBM-08-2014-0694http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/full/10.1108/JPBM-08-2014-0694http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JPBM-08-2014-0694http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/pdfplus/10.1108/BFJ-07-2014-0260http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/full/10.1108/BFJ-07-2014-0260http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-07-2014-0260http://dx.doi.org/10.3280/MC2015-003004http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/pdfplus/10.1108/JCM-03-2015-1356http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/full/10.1108/JCM-03-2015-1356http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JCM-03-2015-1356http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2015.04.006http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pts.2197http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.12218http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pts.2184http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10528008.2015.1091664http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/pdfplus/10.1108/BFJ-12-2014-0425http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/full/10.1108/BFJ-12-2014-0425http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-12-2014-0425http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/pdfplus/10.1108/BFJ-07-2015-0248http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/full/10.1108/BFJ-07-2015-0248http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-07-2015-0248http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/pdfplus/10.1108/QMR-06-2014-0054http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/full/10.1108/QMR-06-2014-0054http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/QMR-06-2014-0054http://dx.doi.org/10.1509/jmr.12.0388http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0267257X.2015.1123758http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/col.22049http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14783363.2015.1004308http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2016.03.005


16/18

18. Lewis Xinwei Liao, Armando Maria Corsi, Polymeros Chrysochou, Larry Lockshin. 2015. Emotional responses towards foodpackaging: A joint application of self-report and physiological measures of emotion. Food Quality and Preference 42, 48-55.[CrossRef ]

19. Crawford Moodie, Richard Purves, Jennifer McKell, Marisa de Andrade. 2015. Novel Means of Using Cigarette Packaging andCigarettes to Communicate Health Risk and Cessation Messages: A Qualitative Study. International Journal of Mental Healthand Addiction 13, 333-344. [CrossRef ]

20. Edward Shih-Tse Wang. 2015. Different Effects of Utilitarian and Hedonic Benefits of Retail Food Packaging on Perceived

Product Quality and Purchase Intention. Journal of Food Products Marketing 1-13. [CrossRef ]21. X.E. Li, S.M. Jervis, M.A. Drake. 2015. Examining Extrinsic Factors that Influence Product Acceptance: A Review. Journal of

Food Science 80:10.1111/jfds.2015.80.issue-5, R901-R909. [CrossRef ]22. Mar Gómez, David Martín-Consuegra, Arturo Molina. 2015. The importance of packaging in purchase and usage behaviour.

International Journal of Consumer Studies 39:10.1111/ijcs.v39.3, 203-211. [CrossRef ]23. Toni Ryynänen, Elina Rusko. 2015. Professionals' View of Consumers' Packaging Interactions - A Narrative Analysis. Packaging

Technology and Science 28:10.1002/pts.v28.4, 341-355. [CrossRef ]24. Markus Joutsela, Virpi Korhonen. 2015. Capturing the User Mindset - Using the Online Research Community Method in

Packaging Research. Packaging Technology and Science 28:10.1002/pts.v28.4, 325-340. [CrossRef ]25. Agnieszka Izabela Baruk Department of Systems Innovation Management, Lódz University of Technology, Lublin, Poland Anna

Iwanicka Department of Economics and Management, University of Life Sciences in Lublin, Lublin, Poland . 2015. Polish final

purchasers’ expectations towards the features of dairy product packaging in the context of buying decisions.British Food Journal 117:1, 178-194. [ Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]26. Rubén Rebollar, Iván Lidón, Javier Martín, Miriam Puebla. 2015. The identification of viewing patterns of chocolate snack

packages using eye-tracking techniques. Food Quality and Preference 39, 251-258. [CrossRef ]27. Anna Fenko, Jean-Marie Leufkens, Joris J. van Hoof. 2015. New product, familiar taste: Effects of slogans on cognitive and

affective responses to an unknown food product among food neophobics and neophilics. Food Quality and Preference 39, 268-276.[CrossRef ]

28. Suraj Kushe Shekhar, P.T. Raveendran. 2015. Promises of silent salesman to the FMCG industry: an investigation using lineardiscriminant analysis approach. Management & Marketing 10. . [CrossRef ]

29. Christopher Simms Portsmouth Business School, University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth, UK Paul Trott Portsmouth BusinessSchool, University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth, UK . 2014. Conceptualising the management of packaging within new productdevelopment. European Journal of Marketing 48:11/12, 2009-2032. [ Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

30. Eleonora Seimiene, Egle Kamarauskaite. 2014. Effect of Brand Elements on Brand Personality Perception. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 156, 429-434. [CrossRef ]

31. Pei-Jou Kuo, Nelson A. Barber. 2014. Exploring Dishware Influences on Product Evaluation, Willingness to Pay, and RestaurantType. Journal of Foodservice Business Research 17, 369-389. [CrossRef ]

32. Lynn Sudbury-Riley Management School, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK . 2014. Unwrapping senior consumers’packaging experiences. Marketing Intelligence & Planning 32:6, 666-686. [ Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

33. Mehmet Seckin Aday, Ugur Yener. 2014. Understanding the buying behaviour of young consumers regarding packaging attributesand labels. International Journal of Consumer Studies 38:10.1111/ijcs.2014.38.issue-4, 385-393. [CrossRef ]

34. Maja Arslanagić, Almir Peštek, Selma Kadić-Maglajlić. 2014. Perceptions of Healthy Food Packaging Information: Do Men andWomen Perceive Differently?. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 109, 78-82. [CrossRef ]

35. Daleen van der Merwe, Stephné Viljoen, Hanli de Beer, Magdalena Bosman, Elizabeth Kempen. 2013. Consumers' experiences

of cold chain food packaging: A qualitative study among women in South Africa. International Journal of Consumer Studies 37:10.1111/ijcs.2013.37.issue-6, 650-657. [CrossRef ]36. Stuart Roper, Cathy Parker. 2013. Doing well by doing good: A quantitative investigation of the litter effect. Journal of Business

Research 66, 2262-2268. [CrossRef ]37. Bo Rundh Department of Business Administration, Karlstad Universit y, Karlstad, Sweden . 2013. Linking packaging to

marketing: how packaging is influencing the marketing strategy. British Food Journal 115:11, 1547-1563. [ Abstract] [Full Text][PDF]

38. S.T. Wang Edward Graduate Institute of Bio-Industry Management, National Chung Hsing University, Taichung, Taiwan .2013. The influence of visual packaging design on perceived food product quality, value, and brand preference. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management 41:10, 805-816. [ Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-12-2011-0297http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2012.02.018http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.12052http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.12105http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pts.2107http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.12168http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1750-3841.12852http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/pdfplus/10.1108/IJRDM-12-2012-0113http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/full/10.1108/IJRDM-12-2012-0113http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/IJRDM-12-2012-0113http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/pdfplus/10.1108/BFJ-12-2011-0297http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/full/10.1108/BFJ-12-2011-0297http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-12-2011-0297http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2012.02.018http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.12052http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.12.423http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.12105http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/pdfplus/10.1108/MIP-02-2013-0027http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/full/10.1108/MIP-02-2013-0027http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/MIP-02-2013-0027http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15378020.2014.967552http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.11.216http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/pdfplus/10.1108/EJM-12-2012-0733http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/full/10.1108/EJM-12-2012-0733http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/EJM-12-2012-0733http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/mmcks-2015-0020http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2014.07.021http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2014.08.002http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/pdfplus/10.1108/BFJ-06-2014-0188http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/full/10.1108/BFJ-06-2014-0188http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-06-2014-0188http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pts.2106http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pts.2107http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.12168http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1750-3841.12852http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10454446.2014.885867http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11469-014-9530-1http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2015.01.009


17/18

39. Iris Vilnai-Yavetz, Ran Koren. 2013. Cutting through the clutter: purchase intentions as a function of packaging instrumentality,aesthetics, and symbolism. The International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research 23, 394-417. [CrossRef ]

40. Tobias OtterbringService Research Center, Karlstad University, Karlstad, Sweden Poja ShamsService Research Center,Karlstad University, Karlstad, Sweden Erik WästlundService Research Center, Karlstad University, Karlstad, Sweden AndersGustafssonService Research Center, Karlstad University, Karlstad, Sweden, and BI – Norwegian School of Management, Oslo,Norway. 2013. Left isn't always right: placement of pictorial and textual package elements.British Food Journal 115:8, 1211-1225.[ Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

41. Kaisa Grönman, Risto Soukka, Terhen Järvi-Kääriäinen, Juha-Matti Katajajuuri, Mika Kuisma, Heta-Kaisa Koivupuro,Margareetta Ollila, Marja Pitkänen, Olli Miettinen, Frans Silvenius, Rabbe Thun, Helena Wessman, Lassi Linnanen. 2013.Framework for Sustainable Food Packaging Design. Packaging Technology and Science 26:10.1002/pts.v26.4, 187-200. [CrossRef ]

42. M. M. Gelici-Zeko, D. Lutters, R. ten Klooster, P. L. G. Weijzen. 2013. Studying the Influence of Packaging Design on ConsumerPerceptions (of Dairy Products) Using Categorizing and Perceptual Mapping. Packaging Technology and Science 26:10.1002/pts.v26.4, 215-228. [CrossRef ]

43. Toni Ryynänen, Annaleena Hakatie. 2013. Low involvement, low price and low quality image renegotiated – a case study of staple food package design. The International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research 23, 204-219. [CrossRef ]

44. Leticia Vidal, Cecilia Barreiro, Beatriz Gómez, Gastón Ares, Ana Giménez. 2013. Influence of Information on Consumers'Evaluations Using Check-All-That-Apply Questions and Sorting: A Case Study with Milk Desserts. Journal of Sensory Studies 28:10.1111/joss.2013.28.issue-2, 125-137. [CrossRef ]

45. D. Labbe, N. Pineau, N. Martin. 2013. Food expected naturalness: Impact of visual, tactile and auditory packaging materialproperties and role of perceptual interactions. Food Quality and Preference 27, 170-178. [CrossRef ]

46. S.J. Westerman, E.J. Sutherland, P.H. Gardner, N. Baig, C. Critchley, C. Hickey, S. Mehigan, A. Solway, Z. Zervos. 2013. Thedesign of consumer packaging: Effects of manipulations of shape, orientation, and alignment of graphical forms on consumers’assessments. Food Quality and Preference 27, 8-17. [CrossRef ]

47. A. Azzi, D. Battini, A. Persona, F. Sgarbossa. 2012. Packaging Design: General Framework and Research Agenda. Packaging Technology and Science 25:10.1002/pts.v25.8, 435-456. [CrossRef ]

48. David Yoon Kin TongFaculty of Business and Law, at Multimedia University, Melaka , Malaysia Xue Fa TongCentre for Diploma Programmes, at Multimedia University, Melaka, Malaysia Evon YinFaculty of Business and Law, all at Multimedia University,Melaka, Malaysia. 2012. Young consumers' views of infused soft drinks innovation. Young Consumers 13:4, 392-406. [ Abstract][Full Text] [PDF]

49. Georgios Koutsimanis, Kristin Getter, Bridget Behe, Janice Harte, Eva Almenar. 2012. Influences of packaging attributes on

consumer purchase decisions for fresh produce. Appetite 59, 270-280. [CrossRef ]50. Lynn MetcalfOrfalea College of Business, California Polytechnic Sta te University, San Luis Obispo, California, USA Jeffrey

S. HessOrfalea College of Business, California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, California, USA Jeffrey E.DanesOrfalea College of Business, California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, California, USA Jay SinghOrfalea College of Business, California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, California, USA. 2012. A mixed‐methods approachfor designing market‐driven packaging. Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal 15:3, 268-289. [ Abstract] [FullText] [PDF]

51. Rubén Rebollar, Iván Lidón, Ana Serrano, Javier Martín, María J. Fernández. 2012. Influence of chewing gum packaging designon consumer expectation and willingness to buy. An analysis of functional, sensory and experience attributes. Food Quality and Preference 24, 162-170. [CrossRef ]

52. Karin Venter, Daleen van der Merwe, Hanli de Beer, Elizabeth Kempen, Magdalena Bosman. 2011. Consumers' perceptionsof food packaging: an exploratory investigation in Potchefstroom, South Africa. International Journal of Consumer Studies

35:10.1111/ijc.2011.35.issue-3, 273-281. [CrossRef ]53

“consumer perceptions of product packaging” journal of consumer marketing

Documents