Negative labels affect consumer understanding of food, study finds.
A rose by any other name may smell as sweet, but a chocolate chip cookie labeled “customer problem” will not taste as excellent as the specific very same product referred to as “new and enhanced,” a brand-new research study recommends.
Scientists identified similar saltine crackers and chocolate chip cookies as either “new and enhanced,” “factory typical,” or “customer complaint” for the study, and then asked individuals to taste the food samples and judge each on likability, freshness, and a series of other qualities.
The crackers and cookies identified “consumer complaint” received considerably lower overall liking ratings than the samples labeled “new and enhanced.” This held real for both crackers– a neutral example– and the cookies, which the researchers thought about an inherently positive food.
” We had both positive and negative bias– but the unfavorable bias was much larger. That unfavorable context had more impact than stating brand-new and enhanced had on generating better ratings,” said Christopher Simons, associate professor of food science and technology at The Ohio State University and senior author of the study.
” On one hand, its not unexpected. On the other hand, the degree of the effect was really surprising.”
The research is published in the journal Food Quality and Preference.
New research finds that unfavorable labels affect customer understanding of food.
An approximated 70 to 80% of brand-new food stop working, even when customer testing has actually recommended they should succeed, Simons said– which is an indication that the techniques utilized to assess possible client assistance may need an upgrade.
” One thing my labs actually interested in is trying to better comprehend and have the ability to forecast consumer habits,” he said. “Currently, companies utilize humans as an instrument to much better comprehend the sensory residential or commercial properties of foods and how they drive taste. Were trying to understand our instrument so we can build a better one that may help decrease item failures and help companies provide items that individuals actually desire.”
The research study evaluated the impact of food labeling on the human predisposition to find negative experiences more remarkable and considerable, but likewise highlighted the tendency for people to be doubtful of claims that an item is much better even if its identified “new and improved.”
The researchers hired 120 individuals aged 18 to 70 from a database of panelists from Ohio States Sensory Evaluation. Samples of two crackers or cookies– from the exact same packaging sleeve– were put on three plates. Researchers told individuals they would be examining a significant providers existing normal factory sample, a improved and new model and a sample that had received client problems.
After each bite, participants showed their total preference of the sample on a 9-point scale from “dislike extremely” to “like incredibly.” They also finished extra ratings of positive and unfavorable attributes that assessed, for example, how crisp and fresh the crackers were and the intensity of the cookies flavor.
The results revealed a clear influence of the labeling on customer perception. With both foods, the general liking scores were substantially lower for samples identified “customer problem” compared to “brand-new and enhanced.” With the saltines, the grievance scores were also considerably lower than scores for the crackers labeled “factory typical.”
In addition, participants typically gave the “customer complaint” crackers and cookies fewer marks for positive qualities and more hits for unfavorable characteristics.
” With the negative contextualized messaging, there were more unfavorable characteristics picked– people didnt like it as much, it wasnt as fresh. Individuals had a more unfavorable opinion of it,” Simons stated. “The favorable messaging inclined towards being more favorable, however not almost as much.”
There might be a lesson here for item developers, Simons stated. Instead of enhancing positive attributes for a new product idea, possibly there would be value in teasing out what consumers perceive as unfavorable and adjusting accordingly.
” If people are more sensitive to those taints, we can utilize it to our advantage as it relates to food,” he said. “You get a larger value by removing things individuals find negative than you do by enhancing those favorable characteristics. Look after the negatives first and youre most likely going to have a more successful product.”
Referral: “The impact of used labeling context on customer 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.2021.104491.
Co-authors, all from Ohio State, include Maria Cotter, Morgan Whitecotton and Devin Peterson.
This work was supported by the U.S. Department of Agriculture National Institute of Food and Agriculture.
” On one hand, its not unexpected. On the other hand, the degree of the impact was actually unexpected.”– Christopher Simons
” With the negative contextualized messaging, there were more negative characteristics picked– people didnt like it as much, it wasnt as fresh. Individuals had a more unfavorable viewpoint of it,” Simons said.” If individuals are more delicate to those taints, we can utilize it to our advantage as it relates to food,” he said. “You get a bigger bang for your buck by removing things individuals discover negative than you do by enhancing those favorable qualities. Take care of the negatives first and youre most likely going to have a more effective item.”
