Can Fancy Food Labels Make the Food Appear Tastier?
Can renaming "Zucchini Cookies" to "Grandma’s Zucchini Cookies" change how people perceive it?
A study decided to test this in a 6-week field study at the Bevier Cafeteria at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. They chose 6 products that were offered twice a week and found descriptive labels for them. The products chosen were as following:
Traditional Cajun Red Beans with Rice (vs. Red Beans with Rice), Succulent Italian Seafood Filet (vs. Seafood Filet), Tender Grilled Chicken (vs. Grilled Chicken), Homestyle Chicken Parmesan (vs. Chicken Parmesan), Satin Chocolate Pudding (vs. Chocolate Pudding), and Grandma’s Zucchini Cookies (vs. Zucchini Cookies).
On Tuesdays and Fridays, 2 of the items were presented with their regular name, 2 of them with a descriptive label, and 2 of them were not presented. In weeks 2 and 3, the items and conditions were systematically rotated. In weeks 4 through 6, the rotation repeated. Each item was available 6 times, during the 6 week period.
As participants checked out, they were given a one-page form and asked to rate the food on various dimensions, on a 9 point scale. They also gave their comments. The analysis of the data suggested that food with descriptive labels were considered more appealing, tastier, and more caloric even though they were identical to the food with regular labels.
It is important to note that this is not a completely randomized design. It possible that people who chose the food with descriptive label differ from those who chose the food with the regular labels, and this inherent characteristic might have played a role in their perceptions of the food. The authors find no difference in age, gender, education, nutrition preferences and food restrictiveness, between those who chose the food with the descriptive labels and with the regular labels. Thus giving us some confidence in the results.
References
Wansink, Brian, Koert Van Ittersum, and James E. Painter. "How descriptive food names bias sensory perceptions in restaurants." Food quality and preference 16, no. 5 (2005): 393-400.
Comments
Post a Comment