Seeing Is Believing (Too Much): The Influence of Product Form on Perceptions of Functional Performance

The present research investigates the manner in which product form communicates functional performance, and examines how the form of a product can alter judgments about feature function. In a series of experiments, product form is pitted against objective information about feature function to understand how conflicting visual and verbal cues are reconciled. The findings indicate that when a product's form suggests a particular level of functional performance, consumers naturally incorporate that information into judgments of feature performance, even when presented with conflicting feature information from an objective source. The role of consumer attention in the process is also explored. The results suggest that product developers may be able to improve perceived performance by focusing design efforts and marketing communications on specific features that visually communicate functionality.

[1]  G. Johar,et al.  Babyfaces, Trait Inferences, and Company Evaluations in a Public Relations Crisis , 2008 .

[2]  J. Langlois,et al.  Maxims or myths of beauty? A meta-analytic and theoretical review. , 2000, Psychological bulletin.

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

[4]  Dick R. Wittink,et al.  Verbal versus realistic pictorial representations in conjoint analysis with design attributes , 1998 .

[5]  Peter H. Bloch Seeking the Ideal Form: Product Design and Consumer Response: , 1995 .

[6]  P. Herr,et al.  An Investigation of the Processes by Which Product Design and Brand Strength Interact to Determine Initial Affect and Quality Judgments , 2002 .

[7]  Mariëlle E. H. Creusen,et al.  The Different Roles of Product Appearance in Consumer Choice , 2005 .

[8]  Harold Sigall,et al.  Beauty is talent: Task evaluation as a function of the performer's physical attractiveness. , 1974 .

[9]  Priya Raghubir,et al.  Ratios in Proportion: What Should the Shape of the Package Be? , 2006 .

[10]  P. Rosenzweig The Halo Effect , 2007 .

[11]  Robert Kreuzbauer,et al.  Embodied Cognition and New Product Design: Changing Product Form to Influence Brand Categorization , 2005 .

[12]  Timothy D. Wilson,et al.  The halo effect: Evidence for unconscious alteration of judgments. , 1977 .

[13]  R. Cooper,et al.  New Products: What Separates Winners from Losers? , 1987 .

[14]  Mel Yamamoto,et al.  The impact of product aesthetics on the evaluation of industrial products , 1994 .

[15]  Margaret G. Meloy,et al.  The Distortion of Information during Decisions , 1996 .

[16]  U. Mueller,et al.  Facial Dominance of West Point Cadets as a Predictor of Later Military Rank , 1996 .

[17]  David H. Silvera,et al.  Bigger is better: the influence of physical size on aesthetic preference judgments , 2002 .

[18]  Margaret G. Meloy,et al.  Predecisional Distortion of Product Information , 1998 .

[19]  Ran R. Hassin,et al.  Facing faces: studies on the cognitive aspects of physiognomy. , 2000, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[20]  J. Wuu,et al.  Bigger is better: maternal and neonatal predictors of hematopoietic potential of umbilical cord blood units , 2001, Bone Marrow Transplantation.

[21]  J. W. Hutchinson,et al.  The Influence of Unity and Prototypicality on Aesthetic Responses to New Product Designs , 1998 .

[22]  A. Todorov,et al.  Inferences of Competence from Faces Predict Election Outcomes , 2005, Science.