Packaging communication: attentional effects of product imagery

This article provides a theoretical framework for understanding the communicative effects of product imagery on attention to the brand, specifically, the attentional effects of incorporating a picture or illustration of the product on the packaging of the product. Empirical results from a virtual reality simulation show that package pictures increase shoppers’ attention to the brand. However this effect is contingent, occurring only for low familiarity brands (private‐label brands) within product categories that offer a relatively high level of experiential benefits. These results suggest that package pictures may be especially useful for private label brands and/or lesser tier national brands whose strategic objectives are to improve consumers’ perceptions of the brand and enter the consideration set.

[1]  Benny Rigaux-Bricmont,et al.  Influences of Brand Name and Packaging on Perceived Quality , 1982 .

[2]  C. McDaniel,et al.  Convenience Food Packaging and the Perception of Product Quality , 1977 .

[3]  George Miaoulis,et al.  Consumer Confusion & Trademark Infringement , 1978 .

[4]  A. Paivio.  Mental Representations: A Dual Coding Approach , 1986 .

[5]  Terry L. Childers,et al.  Picture-Word Consistency and the Elaborative Processing of Advertisements , 1987 .

[6]  Julie L. Ozanne,et al.  Is your package an effective communicator? A normative framework for increasing the communicative competence of packaging , 1998 .

[7]  Ralph L. Rosnow,et al.  Essentials of Behavioral Research: Methods and Data Analysis , 1984 .

[8]  B. Wansink.  Can Package Size Accelerate Usage Volume? , 1995 .

[9]  Jerry C. Olson,et al.  Cue Utilization in the Quality Perception Process , 1972 .

[10]  Michael Jay Polonsky,et al.  Communicating Environmental Information: Are Marketing Claims on Packaging Misleading? , 1998 .

[11]  P. Bone,et al.  Packaging Ethics: Perceptual Differences among Packaging Professionals, Brand Managers and Ethically-interested Consumers , 2000 .

[12]  Jan P.L. Schoormans,et al.  The effect of new package design on product attention, categorization and evaluation , 1997 .

[13]  P. G. Bonner,et al.  Product attributes and perceived quality: foods , 1985 .

[14]  Linda L. Price,et al.  The Role of Imagery in Information Processing: Review and Extensions , 1987 .

[15]  N. S. Johnson,et al.  Some of the thousand words a picture is worth. , 1976 .

[16]  P. Bone,et al.  Ethical Dilemmas in Packaging: Beliefs of Packaging Professionals , 1992 .

[17]  Kathy A. Lutz,et al.  Imagery-Eliciting Strategies: Review and Implications of Research , 1978 .

[18]  Lincoln Atkiss,et al.  Increase your management coaching power , 1961 .

[19]  V. Zeithaml.  Consumer Perceptions of Price, Quality, and Value: A Means-End Model and Synthesis of Evidence: , 1988 .

[20]  G. Belch,et al.  Advertising and Promotion: An Integrated Marketing Communications Perspective , 1997 .

[21]  Brian Sternthal,et al.  Examining the Vividness Controversy: An Availability-Valence Interpretation , 1986 .

[22]  R. C. Stokes.  THE EFFECTS OF PRICE, PACKAGE DESIGN, AND BRAND FAMILIARITY ON PERCEIVED QUALITY. , 1974 .

[23]  R. Pieters,et al.  Visual attention during brand choice : The impact of time pressure and task motivation , 1999 .

[24]  Bernard J. Jaworski,et al.  Strategic Brand Concept-Image Management , 1986 .

[25]  Kevin Lane Keller.  Conceptualizing, Measuring, and Managing Customer-Based Brand Equity , 1993 .

[26]  Robert L. Brown.  Wrapper influence on the perception of freshness in bread. , 1958 .

[27]  Jack M. Feldman,et al.  Self-generated validity and other effects of measurement on belief, attitude, intention, and behavior. , 1988 .

[28]  Seymour Banks.  The Measurement of the Effect of a New Packaging Material Upon Preference and Sales , 1950 .

[29]  Leonard M. Lodish,et al.  Comparing Dynamic Consumer Choice in Real and Computer-simulated Environments , 1992 .