Journal of Consumer Marketing

Consumer perceptions of product packaging

Olga 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 Iss 2
pp. 100 - 112
Permanent link to this document:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/07363760610655032
Downloaded on: 17 July 2016, At: 23:50 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 30 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 40969 times since 2006*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
Downloaded by UNIVERSITAT DE VALENCIA At 23:50 17 July 2016 (PT)

(1996),"Packaging, marketing, logistics and the environment: are there trade-offs?", International Journal of Physical Distribution
& 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 Iss 3
pp. 78-88 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/EUM0000000004565
(2001),"Targeting consumers who are willing to pay more for environmentally friendly products", Journal of Consumer
Marketing, Vol. 18 Iss 6 pp. 503-520 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/EUM0000000006155

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 service
information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit
www.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 online
products and additional customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics
(COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation.

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

 Consumer perceptions of product packaging
Olga 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

Abstract
Purpose – This paper seeks to discuss the need to understand consumer perceptions in order to correctly design product packing and to achieve the
desired 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 key
graphic variables in the design of packaging. The second, (based on consumers’ opinions), to associate each packaging with a positioning strategy. The
seven product-positioning strategies selected were represented from the consumers’ standpoint using multidimensional scaling. Four maps were
obtained related to: alternative packaging colours; alternative packaging typography; alternative packaging graphical forms; alternative packaging
images
Findings – Each positioning strategy appears associated with particular packaging dimensions.
Research limitations/implications – Consumers have exhibited harmonious perceptions towards products-packaging strategies, so one can
Downloaded by UNIVERSITAT DE VALENCIA At 23:50 17 July 2016 (PT)

conclude that a general feeling as to what a particular packaging exactly means exists. So the general opinion should guide packaging designers to
appropriately 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 seven
positioning strategies was explained. For example: “Product ‘A’ is positioned as reasonably priced. People say the price is OK”; 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 were shown and the subject chose the options that seemed most suitable (colour, typography, forms and images). The sequence was
repeated 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.
Introduction
The 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 first
step 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
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]
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 in
the 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 1972 under the title “The age of
positioning”, which served to extend and disseminate the

100
 Consumer perceptions of product packaging
Olga Ampuero and Natalia Vila
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 the
mind 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
Downloaded by UNIVERSITAT DE VALENCIA At 23:50 17 July 2016 (PT)
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 important
factor 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
101
Journal of Consumer Marketing
Volume 23 · Number 2 · 2006 · 100 –112
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 form
part 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 the
company 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).
This function has increased with the arrival and
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
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
Downloaded by UNIVERSITAT DE VALENCIA At 23:50 17 July 2016 (PT)
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 positioning
to 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
102
Journal of Consumer Marketing
Volume 23 · Number 2 · 2006 · 100 –112
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 to
be 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 the
key 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 with these four components, interviewee
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.
 Consumer perceptions of product packaging
Olga Ampuero and Natalia Vila
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
Downloaded by UNIVERSITAT DE VALENCIA At 23:50 17 July 2016 (PT)
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) and
packaging 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)
103
Journal of Consumer Marketing
Volume 23 · Number 2 · 2006 · 100 –112
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 the
maps.
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 is
associated 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
 Consumer perceptions of product packaging Journal of Consumer Marketing
Olga Ampuero and Natalia Vila Volume 23 · Number 2 · 2006 · 100 –112

Figure 1
Downloaded by UNIVERSITAT DE VALENCIA At 23:50 17 July 2016 (PT)

104
 Consumer perceptions of product packaging
Olga Ampuero and Natalia Vila
Figure 2 Packaging colour in product positioning
Downloaded by UNIVERSITAT DE VALENCIA At 23:50 17 July 2016 (PT)
Figure 3 Packaging typography in product positioning
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.
105
Journal of Consumer Marketing
Volume 23 · Number 2 · 2006 · 100 –112
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).
 Consumer perceptions of product packaging
Olga Ampuero and Natalia Vila
Figure 4 Packaging graphic form in product positioning
Downloaded by UNIVERSITAT DE VALENCIA At 23:50 17 July 2016 (PT)
Figure 5 Packaging image differences among positioning strategies
(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).
106
Journal of Consumer Marketing
Volume 23 · Number 2 · 2006 · 100 –112
(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 horizontal lines (52) and oblique
 Consumer perceptions of product packaging Journal of Consumer Marketing
Olga Ampuero and Natalia Vila Volume 23 · Number 2 · 2006 · 100 –112

Table I Packaging colour in product positioning

Accessible Positioning Positioning Positioning
Top category product, based on Positioning based based on based on Non-selective
positioning, prestige reasonable durability, on refined, sober country of excellence, positioning, for the
status, directed to the price guarantee and and elegant origin, high price, middle classes, based
upper classes positioning safety aesthetics patriotism variety on noble principles
Brightness X2 590:047**
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 X2 537:886**
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
Downloaded by UNIVERSITAT DE VALENCIA At 23:50 17 July 2016 (PT)

Temperature X2 546:209**
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 X2 546:209**
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 X2 561:004**
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 X2 599:689**
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)

lines (53), with circles (56), curved lines (62), wavy (4) Accessible products. In contrast to the previous strategy,
outlines (71), asymmetrical compositions (74) and several the packaging of this strategy has been associated with
elements (67). illustrations (78) with people (83).
With respect to the fourth graphical dimension analysed, In summary, each positioning strategy is associated with
“packaging images”, the four quadrants of map 4 (Figure 5) particular packaging dimensions as follows:
show four groups of positioning strategies with different (1) Top category positioning, prestige status, directed to the upper
characteristics (Table IV): classes:
(1) High price products, elegant products and patriotic products. .
Colour: Cold, Dark, Black.
The packaging of these strategies is not related to any of .
Typography: Any.
the image options: photographs and illustrations (81) . Graphic form: None.
and images of the product or people (85). .
Image: Picture, Product.
(2) Non-selective products. Conversely, the packaging of this
strategy is associated with both illustrations and (2) Accessible product, reasonable price positioning:
photographs (80).
.
Colour: Light, White.
(3) Products based on guarantees and upper class products. The .
Typography: Serif, Sans serif.
packaging of both strategies has been associated with .
Graphic form: Any.
photographs (78) and with images of the product (82). .
Image: Illustration, Person.

107
 Consumer perceptions of product packaging Journal of Consumer Marketing
Olga Ampuero and Natalia Vila Volume 23 · Number 2 · 2006 · 100 –112

Table II Packaging typography in product positioning

Accessible Positioning Positioning Positioning
Top category product, based on Positioning based based on based on Non-selective
positioning, prestige reasonable durability, on refined, sober country of excellence, positioning, for the
status, directed to the price guarantee and and elegant origin, high price, middle classes, based
upper classes positioning safety aesthetics patriotism variety on noble principles
Slope X2 552:943**
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 X2 599:689**
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 X2 558:133**
Downloaded by UNIVERSITAT DE VALENCIA At 23:50 17 July 2016 (PT)

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 X2 543:396**
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 X2 528:751
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 X2 578:821**
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
Note: Each cell is a relative frequency (how many persons have associated each property with each strategy in relative terms)

(3) Positioning based on durability, guarantee and safety: (6) Positioning based on excellence, high price, variety:
.
Colour: Red. .
Colour: Cold, Dark, Black.
.
Typography: None. .
Typography: Any.
.
Graphic form: Straight line, Vertical, Straight outline, .
Graphic form: Straight line, Vertical, Straight outline,
Symmetrical, One element. Symmetrical, One element.
.
Image: Picture, Product. .
Image: None.
(4) Positioning based on refined, sober and elegant aesthetics: (7) Non-selective positioning, for the middle classes, based on
.
Colour: Cold, Dark, Black. noble principles:
.
Typography: Bold, Expanded, Upper case, Large, .
Colour: Any.
Roman.
.
Typography: None.
.
Graphic form: None.
.
Graphic form: Horizontal, Oblique, Circle, Curve,
.
Image: None. Wavy outline, Asymmetrical, Several elements.
(5) Positioning based on country of origin, patriotism:
.
Image: Any.
. Colour: Red.
.
Typography: None.
. Graphic form: Straight line, Vertical, Straight outline, Conclusions
Symmetrical, One element. Our results give rise to the following four conclusions. First,
.
Image: None. with respect to packaging colour, it seems that products that

108
 Consumer perceptions of product packaging Journal of Consumer Marketing
Olga Ampuero and Natalia Vila Volume 23 · Number 2 · 2006 · 100 –112

Table III Packaging graphic form in product positioning

Accessible Positioning Positioning Positioning Positioning
Top category product, based on based on refined, based on based on Non-selective
positioning, prestige reasonable durability, sober and country of excellence, positioning, for the
status, directed to price guarantee and elegant origin, high price, middle classes, based
the upper classes positioning safety aesthetics patriotism variety on noble principles
Straight line direction X2 557:685**
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 X2 588:962**
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
Downloaded by UNIVERSITAT DE VALENCIA At 23:50 17 July 2016 (PT)

60 None 39.1 50 39.1 43.5 32.6

Line shape X2 564:546**
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 X2 568:685**
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 X2 535:119**
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 X2 539:965**
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
Note: Each cell is a relative frequency (how many persons have associated each property with each strategy in relative terms)

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, and
symmetrical 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.

109
 Consumer perceptions of product packaging Journal of Consumer Marketing
Olga Ampuero and Natalia Vila Volume 23 · Number 2 · 2006 · 100 –112

Table IV Packaging image differences among positioning strategies

Accessible Positioning Positioning Positioning
Top category product, based on Positioning based based on based on Non-selective
positioning, prestige reasonable durability, on refined, sober country of excellence, positioning, for the
status, directed to the price guarantee and and elegant origin, high price, middle classes, based
upper classes positioning safety aesthetics patriotism variety on noble principles
Image nature X2 5149:580**
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 X2 563:989**
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
Note: Each cell is a relative frequency (how many persons have associated each property with each strategy in relative terms)
Downloaded by UNIVERSITAT DE VALENCIA At 23:50 17 July 2016 (PT)

Managerial implications
From 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 packaging
strategies, 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 has
been 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 be
carried 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 studied over time in order to add a 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)

110
 Consumer perceptions of product packaging
Olga Ampuero and Natalia Vila
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.
Bigné, E. and Vila, N. (2000), “Estrategia de empresa y
posicionamiento 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
Downloaded by UNIVERSITAT DE VALENCIA At 23:50 17 July 2016 (PT)
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 gestión del diseño en la
empresa, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
Ivañez Gimeno, J.M. (2000), La gestión 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.
111
Journal of Consumer Marketing
Volume 23 · Number 2 · 2006 · 100 –112
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 producción 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, visual
identities, 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: Natalia.Vila@uv.es
Executive summary and implications for
managers 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.
 Consumer perceptions of product packaging
Olga Ampuero and Natalia Vila
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
Downloaded by UNIVERSITAT DE VALENCIA At 23:50 17 July 2016 (PT)
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 more
efficient means of ensuring successful positioning. It has also
been pointed out that while packaging remains in the
consumer’s home 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 positioning
strategies 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 established
from 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
To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com
Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints
112
Journal of Consumer Marketing
Volume 23 · Number 2 · 2006 · 100 –112
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 is
additionally 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 précis of the article “Consumer perceptions of product
packaging”. Supplied by Marketing Consultants for Emerald.)
 This article has been cited by:

1. Carlos Velasco, Andy T. Woods, Olivia Petit, Adrian D. Cheok, Charles Spence. 2016. Crossmodal correspondences between
taste and shape, and their implications for product packaging: A review. Food Quality and Preference 52, 17-26. [CrossRef]
2. Catherine Prentice, Nikolai Handsjuk. 2016. Insights into Vodka consumer attitude and purchasing behaviors. Journal of Retailing
and Consumer Services 32, 7-14. [CrossRef]
3. 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 Technology and Science 29:4-5,
225-246. [CrossRef]
4. 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 industry. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence 27:3-4, 413-431. [CrossRef]
5. 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]
6. Nicholas Ford, Paul Trott, Christopher Simms. 2016. Exploring the impact of packaging interactions on quality of life among
older consumers. Journal of Marketing Management 32:3-4, 275-312. [CrossRef]
7. 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 53:1, 110-123. [CrossRef]
Downloaded by UNIVERSITAT DE VALENCIA At 23:50 17 July 2016 (PT)

8. 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 Research: An International Journal 19:1, 4-26. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
9. 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’s
expectations towards dairy product packaging. British Food Journal 118:1, 100-118. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
10. 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 parents
and their children (case study: Tehran, Iran). British Food Journal 118:1, 83-99. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
11. Seung Hwan (Mark) Lee, K. Douglas Hoffman. 2016. Wrap-Attack Pack: Product Packaging Exercise. Marketing Education
Review 26:1, 14-19. [CrossRef]
12. S. Thomas, M. ChambaultExplicit Methods to Capture Consumers’ Responses to Packaging 139-159. [CrossRef]
13. Helena Lindh, Annika Olsson, Helen Williams. 2016. Consumer Perceptions of Food Packaging: Contributing to or
Counteracting Environmentally Sustainable Development?. Packaging Technology and Science 29:1, 3-23. [CrossRef]
14. 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 40:1, 92-100. [CrossRef]
15. Greg Clare, Nahide Hancer. 2016. The Influence of Tunable LED Lighting Systems on Consumer Food Label Perceptions.
Food and Nutrition Sciences 07:07, 566-576. [CrossRef]
16. Mu-Chien Chou, Weng-Kit ChongEvery Day for an Active Self-promotion: The Dialogue Between the Shower Gel Packaging
on the Shelf of a Point of Sale and the Consumer 739-751. [CrossRef]
17. Ana M. Arboleda, Carlos Arce-Lopera. 2015. Quantitative analysis of product categorization in soft drinks using bottle
silhouettes. Food Quality and Preference 45, 1-10. [CrossRef]
18. Hanna Berg Center for Consumer Marketing, Stockholm School of Economics, Stockholm, Sweden Magnus Söderlund Center
for 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]
19. Daniele Lama, Gabriele Pizzi. 2015. L'effetto del packaging sulle percezioni di qualità del prodotto nel mercato vinicolo.
MERCATI E COMPETITIVITÀ :3, 61-82. [CrossRef]
20. 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 the
moderating role of pester power. British Food Journal 117:8, 2017-2038. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
21. 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]
22. Crawford Moodie, Richard Purves, Jennifer McKell, Marisa de Andrade. 2015. Novel Means of Using Cigarette Packaging and
Cigarettes to Communicate Health Risk and Cessation Messages: A Qualitative Study. International Journal of Mental Health
and Addiction 13:3, 333-344. [CrossRef]
23. Lewis Xinwei Liao, Armando Maria Corsi, Polymeros Chrysochou, Larry Lockshin. 2015. Emotional responses towards food
packaging: A joint application of self-report and physiological measures of emotion. Food Quality and Preference 42, 48-55.
[CrossRef]
24. 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]
25. Mar Gómez, David Martín-Consuegra, Arturo Molina. 2015. The importance of packaging in purchase and usage behaviour.
International Journal of Consumer Studies 39:3, 203-211. [CrossRef]
26. X.E. Li, S.M. Jervis, M.A. Drake. 2015. Examining Extrinsic Factors that Influence Product Acceptance: A Review. Journal of
Downloaded by UNIVERSITAT DE VALENCIA At 23:50 17 July 2016 (PT)

Food Science 80:5, R901-R909. [CrossRef]

27. Toni Ryynänen, Elina Rusko. 2015. Professionals' View of Consumers' Packaging Interactions - A Narrative Analysis. Packaging
Technology and Science 28:4, 341-355. [CrossRef]
28. Markus Joutsela, Virpi Korhonen. 2015. Capturing the User Mindset - Using the Online Research Community Method in
Packaging Research. Packaging Technology and Science 28:4, 325-340. [CrossRef]
29. 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]
30. 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]
31. 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]
32. Suraj Kushe Shekhar, P.T. Raveendran. 2015. Promises of silent salesman to the FMCG industry: an investigation using linear
discriminant analysis approach. Management & Marketing 10:4. . [CrossRef]
33. Christopher Simms Portsmouth Business School, University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth, UK Paul Trott Portsmouth Business
School, University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth, UK . 2014. Conceptualising the management of packaging within new product
development. European Journal of Marketing 48:11/12, 2009-2032. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
34. Eleonora Seimiene, Egle Kamarauskaite. 2014. Effect of Brand Elements on Brand Personality Perception. Procedia - Social and
Behavioral Sciences 156, 429-434. [CrossRef]
35. Pei-Jou Kuo, Nelson A. Barber. 2014. Exploring Dishware Influences on Product Evaluation, Willingness to Pay, and Restaurant
Type. Journal of Foodservice Business Research 17:5, 369-389. [CrossRef]
36. 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]
37. Mehmet Seckin Aday, Ugur Yener. 2014. Understanding the buying behaviour of young consumers regarding packaging attributes
and labels. International Journal of Consumer Studies 38:4, 385-393. [CrossRef]
38. Maja Arslanagić, Almir Peštek, Selma Kadić-Maglajlić. 2014. Perceptions of Healthy Food Packaging Information: Do Men and
Women Perceive Differently?. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 109, 78-82. [CrossRef]
39. 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 37:6,
650-657. [CrossRef]
40. Stuart Roper, Cathy Parker. 2013. Doing well by doing good: A quantitative investigation of the litter effect. Journal of Business
Research 66:11, 2262-2268. [CrossRef]
 41. Bo Rundh Department of Business Administration, Karlstad University, 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]
42. 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]
43. 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 23:4, 394-417. [CrossRef]
44. Tobias OtterbringService Research Center, Karlstad University, Karlstad, Sweden Poja ShamsService Research Center,
Karlstad University, Karlstad, Sweden Erik WästlundService Research Center, Karlstad University, Karlstad, Sweden Anders
GustafssonService 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]
45. 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 26:4, 187-200. [CrossRef]
46. M. M. Gelici-Zeko, D. Lutters, R. ten Klooster, P. L. G. Weijzen. 2013. Studying the Influence of Packaging Design on
Downloaded by UNIVERSITAT DE VALENCIA At 23:50 17 July 2016 (PT)

Consumer Perceptions (of Dairy Products) Using Categorizing and Perceptual Mapping. Packaging Technology and Science 26:4,
215-228. [CrossRef]
47. 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 23:2, 204-219. [CrossRef]
48. 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
28:2, 125-137. [CrossRef]
49. D. Labbe, N. Pineau, N. Martin. 2013. Food expected naturalness: Impact of visual, tactile and auditory packaging material
properties and role of perceptual interactions. Food Quality and Preference 27:2, 170-178. [CrossRef]
50. S.J. Westerman, E.J. Sutherland, P.H. Gardner, N. Baig, C. Critchley, C. Hickey, S. Mehigan, A. Solway, Z. Zervos. 2013. The
design of consumer packaging: Effects of manipulations of shape, orientation, and alignment of graphical forms on consumers’
assessments. Food Quality and Preference 27:1, 8-17. [CrossRef]
51. A. Azzi, D. Battini, A. Persona, F. Sgarbossa. 2012. Packaging Design: General Framework and Research Agenda. Packaging
Technology and Science 25:8, 435-456. [CrossRef]
52. 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]
53. Georgios Koutsimanis, Kristin Getter, Bridget Behe, Janice Harte, Eva Almenar. 2012. Influences of packaging attributes on
consumer purchase decisions for fresh produce. Appetite 59:2, 270-280. [CrossRef]
54. Lynn MetcalfOrfalea College of Business, California Polytechnic State 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 approach
for designing market‐driven packaging. Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal 15:3, 268-289. [Abstract] [Full
Text] [PDF]
55. Rubén Rebollar, Iván Lidón, Ana Serrano, Javier Martín, María J. Fernández. 2012. Influence of chewing gum packaging design
on consumer expectation and willingness to buy. An analysis of functional, sensory and experience attributes. Food Quality and
Preference 24:1, 162-170. [CrossRef]
56. Karin Venter, Daleen van der Merwe, Hanli de Beer, Elizabeth Kempen, Magdalena Bosman. 2011. Consumers' perceptions of
food packaging: an exploratory investigation in Potchefstroom, South Africa. International Journal of Consumer Studies 35:3,
273-281. [CrossRef]
57. C. CHREA, L. MELO, G. EVANS, C. FORDE, C. DELAHUNTY, D.N. COX. 2011. AN INVESTIGATION USING
THREE APPROACHES TO UNDERSTAND THE INFLUENCE OF EXTRINSIC PRODUCT CUES ON CONSUMER
BEHAVIOR: AN EXAMPLE OF AUSTRALIAN WINES. Journal of Sensory Studies 26:1, 13-24. [CrossRef]
 58. Alex GofmanRule Developing Experimentation in Consumer-Driven Package Design . [CrossRef]
59. Gastón Ares, Rosires Deliza. 2010. Studying the influence of package shape and colour on consumer expectations of milk desserts
using word association and conjoint analysis. Food Quality and Preference 21:8, 930-937. [CrossRef]
60. Gastón Ares, Mariángela Besio, Ana Giménez, Rosires Deliza. 2010. Relationship between involvement and functional milk
desserts intention to purchase. Influence on attitude towards packaging characteristics. Appetite 55:2, 298-304. [CrossRef]
61. Gastón Ares, Rosires Deliza. 2010. Identifying important package features of milk desserts using free listing and word association.
Food Quality and Preference 21:6, 621-628. [CrossRef]
62. Maria VernuccioSapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy Alessandra CozzolinoSapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy Laura
MicheliniLUMSA University of Rome, Rome, Italy. 2010. An exploratory study of marketing, logistics, and ethics in packaging
innovation. European Journal of Innovation Management 13:3, 333-354. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
63. M. Estiri, T. Hasangholi, H. Yazdani, H.J. Nejad, H. Rayej. 2010. Food Products Consumer Behaviors: The Role of Packaging
Elements. Journal of Applied Sciences 10:7, 535-543. [CrossRef]
64. Nicholas GrigoriouSuccessful New Product Planning 308-336. [CrossRef]
65. Consumer Perception: 1-22. [CrossRef]
66. David James Bamber, Clay Alex Gransden, Swati Aisha BegPerfume Consumption in India: 77-98. [CrossRef]
Downloaded by UNIVERSITAT DE VALENCIA At 23:50 17 July 2016 (PT)