Negative identifies impact customer understanding of food, research study discovers.
An increased by any other name might smell as sweet, however a chocolate chip cookie identified “consumer complaint” will not taste as excellent as the specific very same item referred to as “new and improved,” a brand-new research study recommends.
“On one hand, it’s not surprising. On the other hand, the degree of the impact was really surprising.”– Christopher Simons
Researchers identified similar cracker crackers and chocolate chip cookies as either “new and improved,” “factory typical, ” or “consumer complaint” for the research study, and after that asked individuals to taste the food samples and judge each on likability, freshness, and a variety of other qualities.
The crackers and cookies identified “consumer complaint” got substantially lower general preference rankings than the samples identified “new and improved.” This was true for both crackers– a neutral example– and the cookies, which the scientists thought about a naturally favorable food.
“We had both negative and positive bias – but the negative bias was much bigger. That negative context had more impact than saying ‘new and improved’ had on generating better ratings,” stated Christopher Simons, associate teacher of food science and innovation at The Ohio State University and senior author of the research study.
“On one hand, it’s not surprising. On the other hand, the degree of the impact was really surprising.”
The research study is released in the journal Food Quality and Preference
New research study discovers that unfavorable labels affect customer understanding of food.
An approximated 70 to 80% of brand-new foodstuff stop working, even when customer screening has actually recommended they ought to succeed, Simons stated– which is an indication that the approaches utilized to determine prospective consumer assistance may require an upgrade.
“One thing my lab’s really interested in is trying to better understand and be able to predict consumer behavior,” he stated. “Currently, companies use humans as an instrument to better understand the sensory properties of foods and how they drive liking. We’re trying to understand our instrument so we can build a better one that may help reduce product failures and help companies deliver products that people actually want.”
The research study evaluated the effect of food labeling on the human predisposition to discover unfavorable experiences more considerable and unforgettable, however likewise highlighted the propensity for individuals to be hesitant of claims that an item is much better even if it’s identified “new and improved.”
The scientists hired 120 individuals aged 18 to 70 from a database of panelists from Ohio State’s Sensory EvaluationCenter Samples of 2 crackers or cookies– from the exact same product packaging sleeve– were put on 3 plates. Researchers informed individuals they would be assessing a significant provider’s present common factory sample, a brand-new and better model and a sample that had actually gotten consumer problems.
After each bite, individuals suggested their general preference of the sample on a 9-point scale from “dislike extremely” to “like extremely.” They likewise finished extra rankings of favorable and unfavorable characteristics that evaluated, for instance, how crisp and fresh the crackers were and the strength of the cookies’ taste.
The results revealed a clear impact of the labeling on customer understanding. With both foods, the general preference ratings were substantially lower for samples identified “consumer complaint” compared to “new and improved.” With the crackers, the problem ratings were likewise substantially lower than rankings for the crackers identified “factory typical.”
In addition, individuals normally provided the “consumer complaint” crackers and cookies less marks for favorable qualities and more hits for unfavorable characteristics.
“With the negative contextualized messaging, there were more negative attributes selected – people didn’t like it as much, it wasn’t as fresh. People had a more negative opinion of it,” Simons stated. “The positive messaging slanted toward being more positive, but not nearly as much.”
There might be a lesson here for item designers, Simons stated. Rather than enhancing favorable characteristics for a brand-new item concept, maybe there would be worth in teasing out what consumers view as unfavorable and changing appropriately.
“If people are more sensitive to those taints, we can use it to our advantage as it relates to food,” he stated. “You get a bigger bang for your buck by removing things people find negative than you do by optimizing those positive attributes. Take care of the negatives first and you’re probably going to have a more successful product.”
Reference: “The impact of applied labeling context on consumer acceptance of differently valenced products” by Maria T. Cotter, Morgan Whitecotton, Devin G. Peterson and Christopher T. Simons, 16 December 2021, Food Quality and Preference
DOI: 10.1016/ j.foodqual.2021104491
Co- authors, all from Ohio State, consist of Maria Cotter, Morgan Whitecotton and Devin Peterson.
This work was supported by the U.S. Department of Agriculture National Institute of Food and Agriculture.
