Chocolate package design combined with price setting:
A consumer purchase intention and overall impression investigation Cao Youjia, Wang Yicheng, Li Simei, Gao Junhong
In our experiments, the research sheds light on consumers’ purchase intention and overall impression towards six types of combination of chocolate package and price: 1. aesthetic package with a relatively high price, 2. aesthetic package with an intermediate price, 3. aesthetic package with a relatively low price, 4.plain package with a relatively high price, 5.plain package with an intermediate price, 6.plain package with a relatively low price. After the six between-subject experiments, we find that package design and price setting do have influence on customers’ preference to purchase, but not as strong as our perception. On the other hand, the packaging has significance influence on the customers’ overall impression towards the product. The aesthetic package with the highest price leaves the customer the best impression. Implications for future application for businesses are discussed in the final part. Key words: Package design, price setting, analysis of variance, purchase intention.
“Man shows that he is affected by appearance, by something that causes him pleasure over and above the immediate utility of the object” (Clay, 1908). Designing aesthetic products to satisfy the consumers’ need is of growing importance in marketing. As core attributes of product, such as quality and functionality, become increasingly homogeneous (Reimann, Schilke, & Thomas, 2010), firms are shifting their efforts from concrete product characteristics towards less concrete ones such as package designing. This trend towards aesthetics in product differentiation may be based on the insight that aesthetic designs seem to trigger certain positive responses in consumers such as an immediate desire to own the product (Norman, 2004); an increased inclination to show off and care for that product (Bloch, 1995); and a higher willingness to pay for it (Bloch, Brunel, & Arnold, 2003). More importantly, products with aesthetic qualities may be treasured long after their functional value fades (Martin, 1998). However, little is known about the preference of purchasing and the impression when consumers experience different designed packages with certain prices. Although packaging, as an integral design element, has recently been investigated by Orth and Malkewitz (2008), they comment that there is no good psychological theory when it comes to packaging aesthetics as well as the related prices and further research is necessary. In summary, we propose that the combination of the package and the price will shed light on the consumer purchase intentions and overall impression, therefore, may enlighten the businesses to wisely appropriate the capital on packaging with a certain price. One fundamental problem limiting work in the area involves the meaning of the concepts: packaging aesthetic is indistinct and elusive construct that often is mistaken for imprecise adjectives like "goodness, or luxury, or shininess, or weight" (Crosby 1979). Because definition is difficult, researchers often depend on one-dimensional self-report measures to capture the concepts (Jacoby, Olson, and Haddock 1973; McConnell 1968; Shapiro 1973) and thus must assume shared meanings among consumers. In experiments 1a, we attempt to differentiate aesthetic from plain package design by measuring scores given by participants between differently packaged chocolate. In experiment 1b, we attempt to figure out buyers’ subjective perceptions of price. Finally, applying the data from experiment 1a and 1b, experiment 2 uses 2*3 matrixes to shed light on the underlying correlation impact with packaging and price on buyers’ preference of purchasing as well as the overall impression, which helps explain consumers behavior and gives suggestion to the domestic chocolate businesses....