BOTTLES, CAPS & CLOSURES: SENSORY RESEARCH
TABLE 1: Overall ranking of product characteristics RANKING OVERALL ORANGE STRENGTH TASTES CITRUSY 1
Translucent plastic bottle with handle
2
3 4 5 6
Carton
Clear plastic bottle Can
Glass bottle No packaging
capacity to influence how consumers receive and perceive the sensory qualities of products. In other words, a pack’s format alone may affect the way we judge the aroma, flavour and mouthful of a drink product for example. We set out thinking that if this was true, it could change the face of packaging innovation. To test the hypothesis
“Packaging format affects consumers’ sensory perception of products” we designed an experiment which initially included the use of our in-house, trained sensory panel and at a later stage, the participation of everyday consumers. We selected ambient orange juice as our product stimulus and we collected five different types of packaging: a) a clear glass bottle, b) a clear plastic bottle, c) a translucent plastic bottle with handle, d) a can and e) a carton. We de-branded the packaging samples to shift the focus onto format rather than logos, graphic executions and branding.
process applies when we interact with packaging. We couldn’t escape it even if we wanted to. This is how the human cognitive and sensory system works. It’s an automatic process that we all find hard to make sense of and verbalise. But consumer research has the capacity not only to explain it, but to also control it.
THE TEST Most recently, our experience in both packaging research and sensory science led us to theorise that packaging also has the
EXPERIMENT STAGE ONE: SENSORY PROFILING We acquired an existing, branded ambient orange juice that comes in a carton container and invited our sensory panel to objectively profile it. The permanent panel consists of carefully screened and trained individuals whose increased sensory acuity allows them to proficiently detect and describe the sensory qualities of a product, regardless of category. We deliberately avoided revealing the brand and packaging to eliminate bias. After careful analysis and evaluation of the aroma, flavour and mouthfeel of the selected orange juice the panel extracted the following attributes: • Aroma – Overall orange strength, fresh, artificial, plastic;
Translucent plastic bottle with handle
Clear plastic bottle Can Carton Glass bottle No packaging
• Flavour – Overall orange strength, citrusy, zesty, fresh, artificial, sweet, acid, bitter, plastic; • Mouthfeel – Smooth, thick, dry.
EXPERIMENT STAGE TWO: CONSUMER EVALUATION We then invited 100 normal consumers, divided into groups of ten, to evaluate the product against the elicited sensory attributes. Although in reality we had one product to test, consumers were told that they would be evaluating a range of six orange juices. In every session, each consumer was first provided a 100 ml sample, served in a clear glass – no presence of packaging – and a list of the attributes. This was to ‘calibrate’ consumers’ taste buds and to make sure that they could relate the listed attributes to the product under evaluation. Once this phase had been
completed consumers were ready to proceed to a full product evaluation exercise. The samples were served one at a time, as before, in clear glasses and poured out of sight of the consumers so they could not see the original packaging. Consumers were asked to slowly consume the product and rate the intensity of the listed attributes on a five-point rating scale. They were then asked to
repeat the process for the remaining five samples. The difference was that the next five samples were presented with packaging. Every group saw the packaging examples in a different order. Rotating the order in which the packs were presented was essential from a research perspective, as it ensured that no pack was constantly seen first or last which could have skewed consumers’ responses. The glasses of juice were distributed and the pack placed, as if
FEELS THICK IN MOUTH Clear plastic bottle
Translucent plastic bottle with handle
Can
Glass bottle Carton
No packaging
casually left behind, at the edge of the table. The consumers were not prompted to either look or interact with the packaging.
EXPERIMENT STAGE THREE: ANALYSIS & RESULTS We statistically analysed the consumer data and found differences in the way consumers responded to the different samples, despite the fact they had consumed the exact same product. When we examined the data further, we found statistically significant differences between three key attributes: ‘overall orange strength in taste’, ‘tastes citrusy’ and ‘feels thick in mouth’. All are extremely important in the orange juice category. When it came to ‘overall
orange strength in taste’, the sample that consumers thought came in the translucent plastic bottle with handle and the one they thought came in carton scored significantly higher than the rest of the samples. The sample that was presented without packaging came last with a statistically significant difference to the rest. When it came to the ‘tastes
citrusy’ characteristic, all the samples presented with packaging scored significantly higher than the sample without packaging, with the translucent bottle with handle coming out on top again. For the final orange juice
characteristic, ‘feels thick in mouth,’ the sample consumers thought came in the clear plastic bottle scored significantly higher than the rest, with no packaging again coming last. Full rankings for all three of the characteristics can be found in Table 1 above. One of the advantages of
consumer research is that it allows you to map consumers’ perception with the use of well
FMCGNews.co.uk | FMCG News | 27
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52