It's not just WHAT you say on the packaging, it's HOW you say it

Many brands put too much effort into the information that should be on the packaging, but few focus on how it should be. Generally, they look at how the market uses claims and callouts and replicate that without even asking themselves if it is the best way to do it. It is important to understand that the way we frame the information on the packaging can affect not only the perception of the product or brand, but also the taste.

The framing effect

The framing effect is a cognitive bias where people decide on options based on whether the options are presented with positive or negative connotations. Equivalent information can be more or less attractive depending on what features are highlighted; e.g. as a loss or as a gain. Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky developed this theory after conducting different studies in which participants were presented with the same information but emphasizing different aspects. In their classic 1981 study, they asked participants to choose between treatments for 600 people who'd contracted a deadly disease. Some participants were told that one of the treatments, "A: would save 200 lives," while others were told it would lead to "B:400 deaths" - the same result, but framed differently. 72% of participants chose treatment A when it was presented with a positive framing ("saves 200 lives"), and only 22% when the same choice was presented with a negative framing ("400 people will die").

But what about packaging and how can we take advantage of this?

Last week I did the same study on social media, including LinkedIn, but with a yogurt describing its fat content. The image below was used:

Across all platforms, there was a large lead for Option A. Approximately 70/30%.

There are several studies that show this. Irwin P. Levin conducted a study entitled "Associative effects of information framing" and a few years later conducted another entitled "How Consumers Are Affected by the Framing of Attribute Information Before and After Consuming the Product". Both studies were conducted with ground beef, with the beef labeled as "75% lean" or "25% fat." In the first study, participants in one group were asked to rate the "75% lean" option and those in the other group were asked to rate the "25%" one. The instructions were as follows:

In the second study, the same instructions were given, but in this one, taste perception was assessed by giving participants the ground beef. In both studies, the "75% lean" option produced significantly more positive results. Although the range in the study in which participants were asked to taste the meat was not as large, differences were noted.

So why do brands not apply this bias?

Probably because most of them are not aware of it or maybe they are and want to play it safe. So it's time for them to ask themselves if the information they are putting into their products is the most effective way to do it, or if they are just doing it because the others are doing it that way.