The impact of visual elements of package on consumers purchase intent and the mediating role of perceived risk
An analysis on food packaged products.

Dissertation by
Maria Inês Fernandes Paz Antunes dos Santos
Student Number: 152116222
Dissertation written under the supervision of
Prof. Paulo RomeiroDissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of requirements for the MSc in Management with Specialization in Strategy and Entrepreneurship at CATÓLICA-LISBON School of Business & Economics
June 2018AbstractTitleThe impact of visual elements of package on consumers purchase intent and the mediating role of perceived risk – An analysis on food packaged products.
AuthorMaria Inês Fernandes Paz Antunes dos Santos
Nowadays, packaging has been acknowledged to be an important strategic marketing tool, especially at the purchasing moment, and can be considered as one of the most relevant factors influencing consumers’ buying behaviour of packaged food products. The visual design of packaging transmits symbolic meaning to consumers, hereby impacting how the product is evaluated by them.
The purpose of this study is to understand the effect of visual elements of packaging; specifically, the effect of incorporating an image of the product or a transparent window on the packaging of the product on purchase intent, giving a special attention to the role of perceived risk.
This dissertation is particularly important regarding low involvement FMCG products, such as packaged salmon and packaged pizza, where packaging is strongly linked with the product in the eyes of the consumer at the point of purchase.
The methodology used for this investigation includes both primary and secondary data analysis; quantitative data was collected through an online survey.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

Results obtained with this study suggest that food packaged products purchase intent is explained by the presence of transparency and product imagery on package as well as by the risk (financial, psychological and functional) associated with the each food category. In addition, according to the dimension of perceived risk, it plays a key role in mediating some of these relationships.

ResumoTítulo
O impacto dos elementos visuais da embalagem na intenção de compra e o papel mediador do risco associado à compra – Uma análise a produtos alimentares embalados.

AutorMaria Inês Fernandes Paz Antunes dos Santos
Hoje em dia, a embalagem dos produtos é considerada um elemento estratégico fundamental de marketing, sobretudo no momento da sua aquisição; é por isso um fator decisivo no comportamento dos consumidores na sua escolha de produtos alimentares embalados.

O design da embalagem confere um significado simbólico aos consumidores desencadeando impacto visual no momento da avaliação do produto que pretendem adquirir, afetando a sua avaliação do produto.
Com este estudo pretende-se compreender o impacto dos elementos visuais da embalagem, sobretudo a incorporação da imagem do produto ou de uma janela transparente permitindo, deste modo, a visualização imediata do produto através da embalagem no momento da aquisição por parte dos consumidores. Mais se deseja salientar a importância do papel do risco (financeiro, psicológico e funcional) associado pelo consumidor nesse processo.

De modo a estudar impacto dos elementos visuais da embalagem e na intenção de compra dos consumidores de produtos embalados, a seguinte dissertação concentra-se em produtos alimentícios, tais como salmão e pizza embalados.
Os métodos utilizados para esta investigação incluem dados primários e dados secundários, envolvendo a realização de um questionário online.
Os resultados obtidos demonstram que a intenção de compra de produtos alimentares embalados é explicada pela presença de elementos transparentes ou imagem do produto na embalagem; e pelo risco associado à compra de cada tipo de produto. Dependendo do tipo de risco associado à compra, este desempenha um efeito mediador em algumas dessas relações.

AcknowledgementsI would firstly like to express my gratitude to my mother, who have constantly supported me through my academic journey and provided me with the best opportunities and the finest education in order to achieve my professional and personal goals. Her optimism and boundless encouragement were truly important and decisive to complete this Dissertation, the final stage of my Master’s degree.
I would like to show my appreciation to my supervisor, Professor Paulo Romeiro, for all his patience, insightful advice, and valuable feedback throughout the entire process.
Also, very important for me is to express my sincere appreciation to my friend and talented designer, Matilde Pinheiro de Melo for helping me with the design of the packages presented on my survey.
I am also very grateful to Ana Rita Azevedo, my manager at Colgate-Palmolive, and my co-workers, who have demonstrated enormous support and constant availability for sharing their valuable knowledge with me.

Last but not least, I am very grateful to my amazing friends, who support me unconditionally.

Table of Contents
TOC o “1-3” h z u Abstract PAGEREF _Toc515415012 h iTitle PAGEREF _Toc515415013 h iAuthor PAGEREF _Toc515415014 h iResumo PAGEREF _Toc515415015 h iiTítulo PAGEREF _Toc515415016 h iiAutor PAGEREF _Toc515415017 h iiAcknowledgements PAGEREF _Toc515415018 h iiiTable of Figures PAGEREF _Toc515415019 h viList of Abbreviations and Acronyms PAGEREF _Toc515415020 h viiChapter 1. Introduction PAGEREF _Toc515415021 h 11.1 Background PAGEREF _Toc515415022 h 11.2 Problem Statement PAGEREF _Toc515415023 h 21.2.1 Research Questions PAGEREF _Toc515415024 h 21.3 Academic and Managerial Relevance of Research PAGEREF _Toc515415025 h 31.4 Research methods PAGEREF _Toc515415026 h 41.5 Dissertation outline PAGEREF _Toc515415027 h 5Chapter 2. Literature Review PAGEREF _Toc515415028 h 62.1 Packaging Relevance PAGEREF _Toc515415029 h 62.2 The role of Packaging PAGEREF _Toc515415030 h 72.3 Elements of Packaging PAGEREF _Toc515415031 h 82.3.1 Visual Elements of Package PAGEREF _Toc515415032 h 92.4 Purchase Intent PAGEREF _Toc515415033 h 112.5. Perceived Purchase Risk PAGEREF _Toc515415034 h 122.5.1 Perceived functional risk PAGEREF _Toc515415035 h 132.5.2 Perceived financial risk PAGEREF _Toc515415036 h 142.5.3 Perceived psychological risk PAGEREF _Toc515415037 h 142.5.4 Perceived Consequences of Purchase mistake PAGEREF _Toc515415038 h 14Chapter 3. Methodology PAGEREF _Toc515415039 h 173.1 Review of Conceptual Model and Research Approach PAGEREF _Toc515415040 h 173.2 Primary Data PAGEREF _Toc515415041 h 183.2.1 Online Survey PAGEREF _Toc515415042 h 183.4 Data Analysis PAGEREF _Toc515415043 h 21Chapter 4. Results and Discussion PAGEREF _Toc515415044 h 224.1 Sample Characterization PAGEREF _Toc515415045 h 224.2 Measures Reliability PAGEREF _Toc515415046 h 254.3 Results from the Hypothesis Test PAGEREF _Toc515415047 h 264.3.1 Descriptive Statistics PAGEREF _Toc515415048 h 264.3.2 The effect of visual elements variables over packaged products purchase intent PAGEREF _Toc515415049 h 304.3.3 The effects of visual elements of package variables on perceived functional risk PAGEREF _Toc515415050 h 334.3.4 The effects of the different types of perceived risk on packaged products purchase intent PAGEREF _Toc515415051 h 354.3.3 The mediating effect of risk on the relationship between visual elements of package and purchase intent PAGEREF _Toc515415052 h 37Chapter 5. Conclusions and Limitations PAGEREF _Toc515415053 h 415.1 Main Findings and Conclusions PAGEREF _Toc515415054 h 415.1.1 The effect of visual elements of package on consumer’s purchase intent PAGEREF _Toc515415055 h 415.1.2 The mediating role of perceived risk PAGEREF _Toc515415056 h 435.2 Academic/ Managerial Implications PAGEREF _Toc515415057 h 445.3 Limitations and Further Research PAGEREF _Toc515415058 h 45Chapter 6. References PAGEREF _Toc515415059 h 46Chapter 7. Appendices PAGEREF _Toc515415060 h 507.1 Appendix I: Online Survey Guideline PAGEREF _Toc515415061 h 507.2 Appendix II: SPSS Output – Demographic PAGEREF _Toc515415062 h 567.3 Appendix 3 – SPSS Output – Measure variables PAGEREF _Toc515415063 h 597.3 Appendix 4 – SPSS Output – Inferential Statistics Hypothesis PAGEREF _Toc515415064 h 62

Table of Figures TOC h z c “Figure” Figure 1: Conceptual Framework of proposed hypotheses. PAGEREF _Toc515449205 h 16Figure 2: Questionnaire Design. PAGEREF _Toc515449206 h 20Figure 3: Proposed constructs, number of scale items and relevant literature sources. PAGEREF _Toc515449207 h 20Figure 4: Survey respondents per scenario. PAGEREF _Toc515449208 h 23Figure 5: Survey respondents about the frequency of purchase per food category. PAGEREF _Toc515449209 h 23Figure 6: Demographic characteristics of the sample. PAGEREF _Toc515449210 h 24Figure 7: Demographic characteristics of the sample (Age). PAGEREF _Toc515449211 h 25Figure 8: Survey items’ reliabilities. PAGEREF _Toc515449212 h 26Figure 9: Descriptive statistics for Visual Elements of packaging. PAGEREF _Toc515449213 h 27Figure 10: Descriptive statistics for each dimension of Perceived Financial Risk. PAGEREF _Toc515449214 h 27Figure 11: Descriptive statistics for each dimension of Perceived Functional Risk. PAGEREF _Toc515449215 h 28Figure 12: Descriptive statistics for each dimension of Perceived Psychological Risk. PAGEREF _Toc515449216 h 29Figure 13: Descriptive statistics for Purchase Intent. PAGEREF _Toc515449217 h 29Figure 14: Variable Relationship for Visual Elements of Package (H1). PAGEREF _Toc515449218 h 30Figure 15: Variable Relationship for each product category and each packaging design (H1a and H1b). PAGEREF _Toc515449219 h 32Figure 16: Variable relationship for Total Sample (H3a e H3b). PAGEREF _Toc515449220 h 34Figure 17: Variable Relationship for total Sample (H4a, H4b and H4c). PAGEREF _Toc515449221 h 35Figure 18: The mediating effect of perceived functional risk in the relationship between visual elements of package and purchase intent. PAGEREF _Toc515449222 h 38Figure 19: The mediating effect of perceived financial risk in the relationship between visual elements of package and purchase intent. PAGEREF _Toc515449223 h 39Figure 20: The mediating effect of perceived psychological risk in the relationship between visual elements of package and purchase intent. PAGEREF _Toc515449224 h 40Figure 21: Status of Hypotheses H1. PAGEREF _Toc515449225 h 42Figure 22: Status of Hypothesis H2. PAGEREF _Toc515449226 h 42Figure 23: Status of Hypotheses H3. PAGEREF _Toc515449227 h 43Figure 24: Status of Hypotheses H4. PAGEREF _Toc515449228 h 43

List of Abbreviations and AcronymsDV Dependent Variable
IV Independent Variable
PI Purchase Intent
FMCG Fast Moving Consumer Goods
SPSS Statistical Package for the Social Sciences 
VIF Variance Inflation Factor
PG Package displaying a picture of pizza
PS Pizza’s package with a transparent window
SG Package displaying a picture of salmon
SS Salmon’s package with a transparent window
“See-Through” (variable) Transparent packaging
“Opaque” (variable) Opaque packaging
“Graphs” (variable) Package displaying an image of the product
PRfunc Perceived Functional Risk measure
PRfin Perceived Financial Risk measure
PRpsy Perceived Psychological Risk measure
Multicollinearity term used to describe the case when the intercorrelation of predictor variables is high.

Chapter 1. Introduction1.1 Background
As a result of the changes in consumers’ lifestyle and the growing importance of self-service marketing on a daily basis, companies are increasingly adopting diverse techniques to compete with each other, trying to attract the customers’ attention. Thus, packaging is becoming a primary vehicle of branding and communication ADDIN CSL_CITATION { “citationItems” : { “id” : “ITEM-1”, “itemData” : { “DOI” : “10.1108/10610420010316339”, “ISBN” : “10.1108/10610420010316339”, “ISSN” : “1061-0421”, “PMID” : “5492578”, “abstract” : “The verbal and visual components of package design”, “author” : { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Rettie”, “given” : “Ruth”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” }, { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Brewer”, “given” : “Carol”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” } , “container-title” : “Journal of Product & Brand Management”, “id” : “ITEM-1”, “issue” : “1”, “issued” : { “date-parts” : “2000” }, “page” : “56-70”, “title” : “The verbal and visual components of package design”, “type” : “article-journal”, “volume” : “9” }, “uris” : “http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=d1622987-0ff0-461d-ac8f-ba8db36df3af” } , “mendeley” : { “formattedCitation” : “(Rettie & Brewer, 2000)”, “plainTextFormattedCitation” : “(Rettie & Brewer, 2000)”, “previouslyFormattedCitation” : “(Rettie & Brewer, 2000)” }, “properties” : { “noteIndex” : 9 }, “schema” : “https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json” }(Rettie & Brewer, 2000).
Packaging is defined as “the container for a product – encompassing the physical appearance of the container and including the design, colour, shape, labelling and materials used” ADDIN CSL_CITATION { “citationItems” : { “id” : “ITEM-1”, “itemData” : { “ISBN” : “9194793174”, “author” : { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Agariya”, “given” : “Arun Kumar”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” }, { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Johari”, “given” : “Ankur”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” }, { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Sharma”, “given” : “Hitesh K”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” }, { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Chandraul”, “given” : “Udit N S”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” }, { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Singh”, “given” : “Deepali”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” } , “id” : “ITEM-1”, “issue” : “2”, “issued” : { “date-parts” : “2012” }, “page” : “1-13”, “title” : “The Role of Packaging in Brand Communication”, “type” : “article-journal”, “volume” : “3” }, “uris” : “http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=83771487-6eab-4ebd-89f7-a2de47a92dcb” } , “mendeley” : { “formattedCitation” : “(Agariya, Johari, Sharma, Chandraul, & Singh, 2012)”, “manualFormatting” : “(Agariya et al.,2012)”, “plainTextFormattedCitation” : “(Agariya, Johari, Sharma, Chandraul, & Singh, 2012)”, “previouslyFormattedCitation” : “(Agariya, Johari, Sharma, Chandraul, & Singh, 2012)” }, “properties” : { “noteIndex” : 9 }, “schema” : “https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json” }(Agariya et al.,2012). Following the same path, ADDIN CSL_CITATION { “citationItems” : { “id” : “ITEM-1”, “itemData” : { “abstract” : “This paper introduces research in progress aimed at developing empirically-based guidelines to assist managers in selecting wine packaging design elements that evoke strategically valued consumer impressions. A series of studies identifies salient packaging design elements and links those elements to product-category specific brand personality impressions. Ultimately, by more accurately matching packaging design elements to package content, buyer disconfirmation of expectations after initial purchase will be minimized, stimulating repeat sales.”, “author” : { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Malkewitz”, “given” : “Keven”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” } , “container-title” : “3rd International Wine Business Research Conference”, “id” : “ITEM-1”, “issue” : “July”, “issued” : { “date-parts” : “2006” }, “page” : “6-7”, “title” : “Packaging Design As Resource for the Construction of Brand Identity”, “type” : “article-journal” }, “uris” : “http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=2c25897b-942f-489f-9b6a-fe760c12f5a3” } , “mendeley” : { “formattedCitation” : “(Malkewitz, 2006)”, “manualFormatting” : “Malkewitz (2006)”, “plainTextFormattedCitation” : “(Malkewitz, 2006)”, “previouslyFormattedCitation” : “(Malkewitz, 2006)” }, “properties” : { “noteIndex” : 9 }, “schema” : “https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json” }Malkewitz (2006)’s defined package design as the different elements chosen and blended into a holistic design in to achieve a specific sensory effect.
Besides the basic function of protecting the product, packaging also has the fundamental function of disclosing the package’s content ADDIN CSL_CITATION { “citationItems” : { “id” : “ITEM-1”, “itemData” : { “DOI” : “10.5539/ibr.v8n5p66”, “ISSN” : “1913-9012”, “abstract” : “The objective of this research was to analyze the academic literature focusing on how product packaging influences consumer behavior through the use of a bibliometric study. To accomplish this, we analyzed 111 articles, published from 1982 to 2014, indexed in the Web of Science database maintained by Thomson Reuters (formerly the ISI Web of Knowledge). For the analysis, we used descriptive statistics, bibliometric analyses, and networks to explore characteristics of the articles that related to their authors, journals, evolution, keywords, and research topics. Published manuscripts had a network of dispersed ownership without a central author; most works were published in the United States. Although most of the articles were from the categories of Business & Economics and Food Science & Technology, there is a growing trend in the amount of research and its expansion into subject areas such as chemistry, nutrition, engineering, and more recently, environmental studies, behavioral science, and public policy. An article by Wansink (1996) was the most-cited out of the survey of 111 articles, as well as the most-cited reference for these items. We conclude that the study of packaging and its influence on consumer behavior is a multidisciplinary subject that is highly relevant to purchase decisions, conscious consumption, food preservation, health problems, contamination, storage and transport, obesity and smoking, and sustainability issues.”, “author” : { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Vieira”, “given” : “Kelly Carvalho”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” }, { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Alcantara”, “given” : “Valderu00ed De Castro”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” }, { “dropping-particle” : “do”, “family” : “Prado”, “given” : “Josu00e9 Willer”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” }, { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Pinto”, “given” : “Cintia Loos”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” }, { “dropping-particle” : “de”, “family” : “Rezende”, “given” : “Daniel Carvalho”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” } , “container-title” : “International Business Research”, “id” : “ITEM-1”, “issue” : “5”, “issued” : { “date-parts” : “2015” }, “page” : “66-80”, “title” : “How Does Packaging Influence Consumer Behavior? A Multidisciplinary Bibliometric Study”, “type” : “article-journal”, “volume” : “8” }, “uris” : “http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=83397cd5-22a1-4652-ba8f-42e9362e26da” } , “mendeley” : { “formattedCitation” : “(Vieira, Alcantara, Prado, Pinto, & Rezende, 2015)”, “manualFormatting” : “(Vieira et al., 2015)”, “plainTextFormattedCitation” : “(Vieira, Alcantara, Prado, Pinto, & Rezende, 2015)”, “previouslyFormattedCitation” : “(Vieira, Alcantara, Prado, Pinto, & Rezende, 2015)” }, “properties” : { “noteIndex” : 9 }, “schema” : “https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json” }(Vieira et al., 2015) by providing adequate and detailed information to the consumers about the product. Furthermore, this marketing tool is also used as a valuable technique to gain competitive advantage and it can have an impact on consumer purchasing decisions. As a matter of fact, around three-quarters of food and drink purchase decisions are made at the point of sale, ADDIN CSL_CITATION { “citationItems” : { “id” : “ITEM-1”, “itemData” : { “DOI” : “10.1016/j.foodqual.2016.11.010”, “ISSN” : “09503293”, “abstract” : “Images of food constitute salient visual stimuli in the mind of the consumer. They are capable of promoting both feelings of hunger and the desire for food. It should not, then, come as any surprise that many product packages present the food contained within as a salient aspect of their visual design. Conventionally, this has been achieved primarily by the use of attractive visual imagery showing the product on the outside of the packaging. Nowadays, however, developments in packaging are increasingly enabling designers to add transparent elements, thus allowing consumers to directly see the product before purchase. Yet relatively little is known about the effectiveness of product imagery as compared with transparent packaging. In this review, we address the various ways in which seeing (images of) food influences the consumer. The implications for packaging designs which include: (a) images of food, and (b) transparent elements, are investigated. Guidelines are also provided for designers and brands on the ways in which to take advantage of these effects of being able to see the food.”, “author” : { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Simmonds”, “given” : “Gregory”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” }, { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Spence”, “given” : “Charles”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” } , “container-title” : “Food Quality and Preference”, “id” : “ITEM-1”, “issued” : { “date-parts” : “2017” }, “page” : “340-351”, “publisher” : “Elsevier Ltd”, “title” : “Thinking inside the box: How seeing products on, or through, the packaging influences consumer perceptions and purchase behaviour”, “type” : “article-journal”, “volume” : “62” }, “uris” : “http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=43d3ca10-1ce0-4626-b6ec-a7adf79221ec” } , “mendeley” : { “formattedCitation” : “(Simmonds & Spence, 2017)”, “manualFormatting” : “Simmonds & Spence (2017”, “plainTextFormattedCitation” : “(Simmonds & Spence, 2017)”, “previouslyFormattedCitation” : “(Simmonds & Spence, 2017)” }, “properties” : { “noteIndex” : 9 }, “schema” : “https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json” }Simmonds & Spence (2017) by Connolly & Davison (1996). Furthermore, 90% of consumers make a purchase decision only after examining the front of the package, and 85% of consumers make a purchase without having picked up a substitute product (Urbany, Dickson, & Kalapurakal, 1996).
As stated by Rundh (2005), packaging can capture consumers’ attention and influence their perceptions about the particular product contained in it. On the other hand, packaging is an important marketing tool for differentiation as it helps consumers to identify and distinguish a particular product from a wide range of similar products ADDIN CSL_CITATION { “citationItems” : { “id” : “ITEM-1”, “itemData” : { “DOI” : “10.1108/10610420110410531”, “ISBN” : “10610421”, “ISSN” : “1061-0421”, “PMID” : “220599584”, “abstract” : “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 shoppersu2019 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 consumersu2019 perceptions of the brand and enter the consideration set.”, “author” : { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Underwood”, “given” : “Robert L.”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” }, { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Klein”, “given” : “Noreen M.”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” }, { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Burke”, “given” : “Raymond R.”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” } , “container-title” : “Journal of Product & Brand Management”, “id” : “ITEM-1”, “issue” : “7”, “issued” : { “date-parts” : “2001” }, “page” : “403-422”, “title” : “Packaging communication: attentional effects of product imagery”, “type” : “article-journal”, “volume” : “10” }, “uris” : “http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=af7cd8bc-2094-47cd-84ae-846a96061d8b” } , “mendeley” : { “formattedCitation” : “(Underwood, Klein, & Burke, 2001)”, “plainTextFormattedCitation” : “(Underwood, Klein, & Burke, 2001)”, “previouslyFormattedCitation” : “(Underwood, Klein, & Burke, 2001)” }, “properties” : { “noteIndex” : 9 }, “schema” : “https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json” }(Underwood, Klein, ; Burke, 2001), and it can impart visual presence and uniqueness to the product ADDIN CSL_CITATION { “citationItems” : { “id” : “ITEM-1”, “itemData” : { “author” : { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Silayoi”, “given” : “Pinya”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” }, { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Speece”, “given” : “Mark”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” } , “container-title” : “British Food Journal”, “id” : “ITEM-1”, “issue” : “8”, “issued” : { “date-parts” : “2004” }, “page” : “607-628”, “title” : “Packaging and purchase decisions Introduction : packaging at the point of sale The packaged food products market in Thailand”, “type” : “article-journal”, “volume” : “106” }, “uris” : “http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=319fc176-bf50-421f-aed5-2b060c543692” } , “mendeley” : { “formattedCitation” : “(P. Silayoi & Speece, 2004)”, “manualFormatting” : “(Silayoi and Speece, 2004)”, “plainTextFormattedCitation” : “(P. Silayoi & Speece, 2004)”, “previouslyFormattedCitation” : “(P. Silayoi & Speece, 2004)” }, “properties” : { “noteIndex” : 9 }, “schema” : “https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json” }(Silayoi and Speece, 2004). Nevertheless, it is important to highlight that packaging can have both a positive impact and a negative impact on the product, as it can either improve the product’s image, or it can be a cause of product’s failure as it is the first contact between the product and the consumer in the store.

However, consumers perceive the act of purchasing as a risky endeavour, and this risk can affect their likelihood of purchase (Wood and Sheer, 1996). When consumers intend to buy a product or a service, they frequently hesitate before making the final decision as they do not have the certainty the actual results will not differ from their expectations (Roselius, 1971), thus the consumer behaviour is motivated to reduce the perceived risk ADDIN CSL_CITATION { “citationItems” : { “id” : “ITEM-1”, “itemData” : { “DOI” : “10.1177/1077727X00283002”, “ISBN” : “1077-727X”, “ISSN” : “15523934”, “abstract” : “In a two-part study, the amount and types of information available in television-shopping segments selling apparel were examined. In Phase 1, a content analysis of 60 segments selling apparel was conducted. In Phase 2, using an experimental format, a convenience sample of 128 middle-aged women (M = 46 years) viewed a 6-minute television-shopping segment selling apparel and assessed perceived risk, perceived amount of information available in the segment, and purchase intentions, and they answered some open-ended questions about their information-searching activities. Taken together, results of Phases 1 and 2 revealed that when making apparel purchases, participants needed product and customer service information; however, in some segments, that information was never available or was available in less than half the segments coded. Results also revealed that the amount of information perceived from a television-shopping segment selling apparel was negatively related to perceived risk and positively related to purchase intent.”, “author” : { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Kim”, “given” : “Minjeong”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” }, { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Lennon”, “given” : “Sharron J.”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” } , “container-title” : “Family and Consumer Sciences Research Journal”, “id” : “ITEM-1”, “issue” : “3”, “issued” : { “date-parts” : “2000” }, “page” : “301-331”, “title” : “Television shopping for apparel in the United States: Effects of perceived amount of information on perceived risks and purchase intentions”, “type” : “article-journal”, “volume” : “28” }, “uris” : “http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=7db9b3ff-6b16-4945-8693-4c050b7c1603” } , “mendeley” : { “formattedCitation” : “(Kim & Lennon, 2000)”, “plainTextFormattedCitation” : “(Kim & Lennon, 2000)”, “previouslyFormattedCitation” : “(Kim & Lennon, 2000)” }, “properties” : { “noteIndex” : 10 }, “schema” : “https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json” }(Kim ; Lennon, 2000). Therefore, insights on consumer’s risk perception will enable marketers to understand, anticipate and satisfy consumer’s needs and wants, thereby increasing their purchase intention through optimized packaging design.

According to ADDIN CSL_CITATION { “citationItems” : { “id” : “ITEM-1”, “itemData” : { “DOI” : “10.1016/j.jcps.2010.08.003”, “ISBN” : “10577408”, “ISSN” : “10577408”, “abstract” : “We present a summary of the state of the aesthetics literature in consumer psychology, introduce the articles that constitute this Aesthetics Special Issue, and raise a number of research questions that are viable areas for future investigation in the domain of aesthetics. The Special Issue of the Journal of Consumer Psychology on Aesthetics was conceived. The articles include a variety of topics within aesthetics including multisensory aesthetic experiences, conceptual processing of aesthetics, aesthetic design preferences, and individual differences in evaluating aesthetics. The research methods employed include observations and interviews as well as lab and quasi experiments. Next, we introduce the articles that comprise the Special Issue on Aesthetics. We encourage you to pursue the study of aesthetics in consumer psychology and to see the Journal of Consumer Psychology as an outlet both welcoming and receptive to new and exciting developments in aesthetics. We sincerely hope that the readers of this Aesthetics Special Issue will continue to generate important, interesting, and innovative research in the domain of aesthetics in consumer psychology. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)”, “author” : { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Patrick”, “given” : “Vanessa M.”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” }, { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Peracchio”, “given” : “Laura A.”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” } , “container-title” : “Journal of Consumer Psychology”, “id” : “ITEM-1”, “issue” : “4”, “issued” : { “date-parts” : “2010” }, “page” : “393-397”, “title” : “”Curating” the JCP special issue on aesthetics in consumer psychology: An introduction to the aesthetics issue”, “type” : “article-journal”, “volume” : “20” }, “uris” : “http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=96580f57-4df3-4332-b317-b068c63cfc8d” } , “mendeley” : { “formattedCitation” : “(Patrick & Peracchio, 2010)”, “plainTextFormattedCitation” : “(Patrick & Peracchio, 2010)”, “previouslyFormattedCitation” : “(Patrick & Peracchio, 2010)” }, “properties” : { “noteIndex” : 10 }, “schema” : “https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json” }(Patrick ; Peracchio, 2010) despite the increasing awareness of the importance of product packaging, theories to understand how consumers react to the appearance of a product or package are relatively recent. In order to maximize the effectiveness of packaging at the point of purchase, studies about packaging and all its possible elements and their impact on consumer’s product perceptions and consequently purchase decision should be a crucial and relevant issue.

1.2 Problem StatementThe aim of this paper is to examine the impact of visual elements of package on consumer purchase intentions, with particular emphasis on the following variables: the effect of incorporating visual product imagery (product pictures) and transparent elements on the package, and how these elements affect consumers’ perceptions about the product, consequently impacting consumers’ purchase intent.
This study will focus on packaged food goods, comparing two categories with distinct levels of perceived risk: packaged pizza and packaged salmon.
In order to have a clearer understanding of the problem statement addressed on this dissertation, its specification could be the following: Is what you see what you get?1.2.1 Research QuestionsThis dissertation provides a theoretical framework to address these packaging doubts and it studies some contingencies under which package design are more or less effective: the presence of an image of the product or the presence of a transparent window on package with exposure of the contained product.
Here below are presented the research questions that have been formulated in order to gain a better understanding of the issue and accomplish the purpose of the research:
RQ1: How do visual elements of package influence consumers’ purchase intention?
RQ2: Does the inclusion of a picture of the product on the package contribute to lower purchase intentions than the inclusion of a transparent element on the package?
RQ3: How visual elements of package influences the uncertainty perceived by the consumers at the point of purchase?
RQ4: Does perceived purchase risk impact purchase intent?
RQ4: Does perceived risk mediate the relationship between visual elements of package and purchase intent?
1.3 Academic and Managerial Relevance of ResearchThe topic of this dissertation came up while I was grocery shopping at the supermarket. As per common knowledge, it is recognized that consumers may not think very deeply about brands before they walk into the store to buy a product. Moreover, at the point of purchase consumers are exposed to many similar products on the shelf. Thus, package is a key factor in marketing communications, especially at the point of purchase. Findings suggest that 73% of purchase decisions are made at the point of sale and manufacturers are aware of this. In addition, 90% of these purchase decisions are made based on the aesthetics package design elements ADDIN CSL_CITATION { “citationItems” : { “id” : “ITEM-1”, “itemData” : { “author” : { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Keizer”, “given” : “J”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” } , “id” : “ITEM-1”, “issued” : { “date-parts” : “2016” }, “title” : “Faculty of Behavioral Management and Social Sciences The visual influence of transparent product packages”, “type” : “article-journal” }, “uris” : “http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=cbaca5b0-77ce-4128-8766-4cb1b6a06b51” } , “mendeley” : { “formattedCitation” : “(Keizer, 2016)”, “plainTextFormattedCitation” : “(Keizer, 2016)”, “previouslyFormattedCitation” : “(Keizer, 2016)” }, “properties” : { “noteIndex” : 11 }, “schema” : “https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json” }(Keizer, 2016).

In academic terms, the topic of this study constitutes a further investigation of what has been studied in literature and can be considered academically relevant in the deepening of the knowledge of the relationship between the variables relative to visual elements of package, perceived risk and purchase intent. Despite the fact that this topic has been widely studied in previous research projects, the study adds focuses further and expands the research on the effectiveness of product imagery versus transparent window on package in consumer’s purchase intent. The findings highlight the importance of including a mediator variable, the perceived risk and how it mediates these relationships across different food product categories.
Regarding managerial relevance, one of the key challenges for packaging marketers and designers is to create sustainable, well acceptable packaging. Thus, companies can benefit from the results and conclusions that dissertation aims to achieve as they can be used towards a company better use of its marketing resources by develop appropriate and attractive packaging solutions that are able to perform in traditional channels and thus increase the number of sales of packaged food products.
1.4 Research methods
In order to answer the research questions in an appropriate way, both primary and secondary data were used in this master thesis. Secondary data have been collected through a detailed research on previous studies, books, academic journals and articles in order to gather an in-depth background knowledge about packaging, with a special focus on: the evolution of packaging, the visual elements of packaging, consumer drivers of packaged goods’ purchase intent and how perceived risk mediates the relationship between visual elements of package and consumers buying behaviour.
Regarding primary data, an online survey was done and distributed online to quantitatively assess and understand the causal relationships between the variables in study.

The survey was analysed using multiple linear regressions, mediation analysis, frequencies analysis and reliability analysis. The main statistical analysis performed were Mediation models, in order to study the effect of the different types perceived risk considered in this study as a mediator of the relationship between visual elements of package and purchase intent.
All the questionnaire’s responses were analysed using IBM’s SPSS statistical software version 25.0. The data will be treated quantitatively applying frequencies analysis, measures of central tendency (arithmetic mean and median), measures of dispersion or variability (minimum and maximum values, mean and standard deviation), the coefficient of Cronbach’s Alpha and statistical tests (ANOVA test and Sobel test) and linear multiple regressions.
1.5 Dissertation outline
This dissertation will present a total of five chapters. The following chapter contains the literature review. It provides with an in-depth understanding of the hypothesis that this dissertation proposes to answer and is supported by previous studies. It will explain how each relevant variable have an impact on consumers’ purchase intent for packaged goods.

The third chapter comprises the research methodology which will clarify and described the methods used to collect and analyse the data and how each statistical test will be applied to this data.
The fourth chapter, Results Analysis, presents an analysis of the results obtained from the collected data and verify the legitimacy of each hypothesis proposed on this study.

The final chapter contemplates the conclusions of the study, as well as its limitations and some recommendations for future researches in this area of study.

Chapter 2. Literature ReviewThe following chapter will provide a detailed analysis of previous academic research and existing literature to support and justify the hypothesis of this study and establish a context for the dissertation’s research questions. It will be applied to the practical case of its effects on packaging influence consumers purchase intent. Therefore, it begins by explaining the definition and the evolution of the terms in use.
2.1 Packaging RelevanceIn nowadays competitive environment, the interest in packaging as a crucial tool of sales promotion and of stimulator of impulsive purchase intentions is growing progressively, due the increase of self-service and the changes on consumers’ lifestyle. Thus, consumer packaged goods companies are always looking for improved methods to increase the shelf presence and the impact of their products. Following ADDIN CSL_CITATION { “citationItems” : { “id” : “ITEM-1”, “itemData” : { “DOI” : “10.1016/S0167-4870(97)00008-1”, “ISBN” : “01674870”, “ISSN” : “01674870”, “PMID” : “20806”, “abstract” : “Deviations in well-known stimuli attract attention. Furthermore, deviations in the appearance of stimuli affect the way in which consumers categorize stimuli. Our experiment investigates the effect of the degree of deviation of coffee packages on consumers’ attention and categorization. The stimuli are modified packages of the best known Dutch ground coffee brand. The first hypothesis described a positive relation between the attention that a package gets and the degree of deviation of its appearance. Based on the categorization literature, the second hypothesis stated that an O-relation exists between the degree of deviation of the package appearance and the evaluation of the product. The data from the experiment supported both hypotheses. The results suggest that when redesigning stimuli in marketing practice, for instance of products or packages, a trade-off has to be made between (a) the high attention getting value of discrepant stimuli and (b) their ability to transfer existing positive affects to new stimuli that resemble the existing products or packages in the product category.”, “author” : { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Schoormans”, “given” : “Jan P.L.”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” }, { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Robben”, “given” : “Henry S.J.”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” } , “container-title” : “Journal of Economic Psychology”, “id” : “ITEM-1”, “issue” : “2-3”, “issued” : { “date-parts” : “1997” }, “page” : “271-287”, “title” : “The effect of new package design on product attention, categorization and evaluation”, “type” : “article-journal”, “volume” : “18” }, “uris” : “http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=257106ac-ebe1-4e75-bfd0-6c147de5114f” } , “mendeley” : { “formattedCitation” : “(Schoormans & Robben, 1997)”, “plainTextFormattedCitation” : “(Schoormans & Robben, 1997)”, “previouslyFormattedCitation” : “(Schoormans & Robben, 1997)” }, “properties” : { “noteIndex” : 14 }, “schema” : “https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json” }(Schoormans ; Robben, 1997) attribution theory, the package’s ability to get consumer’s attention directly correlates to a positive opinion of the product.
ADDIN CSL_CITATION { “citationItems” : { “id” : “ITEM-1”, “itemData” : { “ISBN” : “9194793174”, “author” : { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Agariya”, “given” : “Arun Kumar”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” }, { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Johari”, “given” : “Ankur”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” }, { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Sharma”, “given” : “Hitesh K”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” }, { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Chandraul”, “given” : “Udit N S”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” }, { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Singh”, “given” : “Deepali”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” } , “id” : “ITEM-1”, “issue” : “2”, “issued” : { “date-parts” : “2012” }, “page” : “1-13”, “title” : “The Role of Packaging in Brand Communication”, “type” : “article-journal”, “volume” : “3” }, “uris” : “http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=83771487-6eab-4ebd-89f7-a2de47a92dcb” } , “mendeley” : { “formattedCitation” : “(Agariya et al., 2012)”, “manualFormatting” : “(Agariya et al., 2012)”, “plainTextFormattedCitation” : “(Agariya et al., 2012)”, “previouslyFormattedCitation” : “(Agariya et al., 2012)” }, “properties” : { “noteIndex” : 14 }, “schema” : “https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json” }(Agariya et al., 2012) define packaging as the wrapping material used to contain, protect, promote, describe, transport, display and identify the goods; and make the product clean and marketable. Some authors argue that packaging is used as a promotional and marketing tool rather than only an extension of the product and it can be considered as one of the key factors influencing consumer’s purchasing decision.
According to Kotler and Keller (2012), packaging is crucial as it is the only communication between the packaged product and the final consumer before making the final decision to buy it at the point of purchase, as packaging influences consumer’s perceptions about the product ADDIN CSL_CITATION { “citationItems” : { “id” : “ITEM-1”, “itemData” : { “DOI” : “10.1108/00070700510615053”, “ISBN” : “0007-070X”, “ISSN” : “0007-070X”, “PMID” : “225150793”, “abstract” : “Purpose u2013 The increasing internationalisation and globalisation of business has forced many firms to reconsider what contributes to their competitive advantage. Despite the importance of packaging it is rather anonymous and has received little or marginal research. The purpose of this paper is to study how packaging can contribute to competitive advantage. Design/methodology/approach u2013 Aspects of the packing industry and market are reviewed. Five case studies covering different packages in the supply chain are presented and analysed. Findings u2013 Structural changes within the European food industry are reinforcing a need for competitiveness where packaging can make the difference for many consumer products. The findings from the case studies and the literature review underscore the importance of packaging and packaging design for fulfilling multi-functions in relation to logistics and marketing in the supply chain from filler to end consumer. New demands due to changes in consumption patterns and habits are requiring innovative packaging solutions in retail outlets. Practical implications u2013 The main implications for management is to understand and take advantage of packaging as a strategic weapon and marketing tool for the entire business, especially within a highly competitive food industry. This is important in every stage of the supply chain either for the transport packaging or as a consumer package in the supermarket. Originality/value u2013 This paper fulfils an identified need for recognising the importance of packaging in business strategy.”, “author” : { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Rundh”, “given” : “Bo”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” } , “container-title” : “British Food Journal”, “id” : “ITEM-1”, “issue” : “9”, “issued” : { “date-parts” : “2005” }, “page” : “670-684”, “title” : “The multiu2010faceted dimension of packaging”, “type” : “article-journal”, “volume” : “107” }, “uris” : “http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=e4573253-fc41-4c58-b90d-55ad825d38c7” } , “mendeley” : { “formattedCitation” : “(Rundh, 2005)”, “plainTextFormattedCitation” : “(Rundh, 2005)”, “previouslyFormattedCitation” : “(Rundh, 2005)” }, “properties” : { “noteIndex” : 14 }, “schema” : “https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json” }(Rundh, 2005). In addition, it is a crucial part of the branding process because it also communicates the image and identity of a company (Agariya et al.,2012).

2.2 The role of PackagingThe move from convenience groceries to hypermarkets and the increased segmentation of markets have promoted the proliferation of products. Consequently, the role of packaging has to work in a more competitive context in the retail environment.

In order to understand the significance of packaging, several studies have been conducted over the last few decades regarding the impact of package appearance on consumer attention, categorization and evaluation and consequently its impact on consumer buying behaviour. In marketing literature, packaging is considered to be part not only of the product, but also the brand itself ADDIN CSL_CITATION { “citationItems” : { “id” : “ITEM-1”, “itemData” : { “DOI” : “10.1108/07363760610655032”, “ISBN” : “0007070091099”, “ISSN” : “0736-3761”, “PMID” : “220136520”, “abstract” : “Consumer perceptions of product packaging”, “author” : { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Ampuero”, “given” : “Olga”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” }, { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Vila”, “given” : “Natalia”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” } , “container-title” : “Journal of Consumer Marketing”, “id” : “ITEM-1”, “issue” : “2”, “issued” : { “date-parts” : “2006” }, “page” : “100-112”, “title” : “Consumer perceptions of product packaging”, “type” : “article-journal”, “volume” : “23” }, “uris” : “http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=689032ea-de0d-4a8a-aa4f-b844985e41f3” } , “mendeley” : { “formattedCitation” : “(Ampuero & Vila, 2006)”, “plainTextFormattedCitation” : “(Ampuero & Vila, 2006)”, “previouslyFormattedCitation” : “(Ampuero & Vila, 2006)” }, “properties” : { “noteIndex” : 15 }, “schema” : “https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json” }(Ampuero ; Vila, 2006).

According to ADDIN CSL_CITATION { “citationItems” : { “id” : “ITEM-1”, “itemData” : { “author” : { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Silayoi”, “given” : “Pinya”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” }, { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Speece”, “given” : “Mark”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” } , “container-title” : “British Food Journal”, “id” : “ITEM-1”, “issue” : “8”, “issued” : { “date-parts” : “2004” }, “page” : “607-628”, “title” : “Packaging and purchase decisions Introduction : packaging at the point of sale The packaged food products market in Thailand”, “type” : “article-journal”, “volume” : “106” }, “uris” : “http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=319fc176-bf50-421f-aed5-2b060c543692” } , “mendeley” : { “formattedCitation” : “(P. Silayoi & Speece, 2004)”, “manualFormatting” : “(Silayoi and Speece, 2004)”, “plainTextFormattedCitation” : “(P. Silayoi & Speece, 2004)”, “previouslyFormattedCitation” : “(P. Silayoi & Speece, 2004)” }, “properties” : { “noteIndex” : 15 }, “schema” : “https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json” }(Silayoi and Speece, 2004), the logistical and original function of packaging is mainly protect the product; however, nowadays the role of packaging has changed, and it is being used as a key sales tool to attract customer’s attention, describe the product and even make the sale. Additionally, package conveys a unique value to products ADDIN CSL_CITATION { “citationItems” : { “id” : “ITEM-1”, “itemData” : { “DOI” : “10.1108/10610420110410531”, “ISBN” : “10610421”, “ISSN” : “1061-0421”, “PMID” : “220599584”, “abstract” : “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 shoppersu2019 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 consumersu2019 perceptions of the brand and enter the consideration set.”, “author” : { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Underwood”, “given” : “Robert L.”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” }, { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Klein”, “given” : “Noreen M.”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” }, { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Burke”, “given” : “Raymond R.”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” } , “container-title” : “Journal of Product & Brand Management”, “id” : “ITEM-1”, “issue” : “7”, “issued” : { “date-parts” : “2001” }, “page” : “403-422”, “title” : “Packaging communication: attentional effects of product imagery”, “type” : “article-journal”, “volume” : “10” }, “uris” : “http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=af7cd8bc-2094-47cd-84ae-846a96061d8b” } , “mendeley” : { “formattedCitation” : “(Underwood et al., 2001)”, “plainTextFormattedCitation” : “(Underwood et al., 2001)”, “previouslyFormattedCitation” : “(Underwood et al., 2001)” }, “properties” : { “noteIndex” : 15 }, “schema” : “https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json” }(Underwood et al., 2001); ADDIN CSL_CITATION { “citationItems” : { “id” : “ITEM-1”, “itemData” : { “author” : { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Silayoi”, “given” : “Pinya”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” }, { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Speece”, “given” : “Mark”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” } , “container-title” : “British Food Journal”, “id” : “ITEM-1”, “issue” : “8”, “issued” : { “date-parts” : “2004” }, “page” : “607-628”, “title” : “Packaging and purchase decisions Introduction : packaging at the point of sale The packaged food products market in Thailand”, “type” : “article-journal”, “volume” : “106” }, “uris” : “http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=319fc176-bf50-421f-aed5-2b060c543692” } , “mendeley” : { “formattedCitation” : “(P. Silayoi & Speece, 2004)”, “manualFormatting” : “Silayoi and Speece, 2004)”, “plainTextFormattedCitation” : “(P. Silayoi & Speece, 2004)”, “previouslyFormattedCitation” : “(P. Silayoi & Speece, 2004)” }, “properties” : { “noteIndex” : 15 }, “schema” : “https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json” }Silayoi and Speece, 2004) and works as a tool for differentiation as it attracts consumer’s attention to a particular brand (Rundh, 2005) from a wide range of similar brands and products. Thus, as declared by ADDIN CSL_CITATION { “citationItems” : { “id” : “ITEM-1”, “itemData” : { “DOI” : “10.1080/09593969.2013.792743”, “ISBN” : “0959-3969”, “ISSN” : “09593969”, “abstract” : “This study contributes to the theoretical understanding of the impact of packaging in marketing, and confirms the importance of perceived instrumentality, aesthetics, and symbolism in this process. This study examined two types of packaging used by a firm that makes chilled meals. One package had a transparent cover showing the food inside and the other had an opaque wrapper showing a picture of the food. Sales for the product with the transparent cover were 30% lower than for the same product packaged in the opaque wrapper. An experimental study examined the effects of packaging on buying intentions. Supermarket shoppers (n = 100) were shown the same product in one of the two packages and answered a survey about the mediating variables: perceived instrumentality, aesthetics, and symbolism, and the dependent variable, purchase intentions. As predicted, participants expressed more interest in buying the product with the opaque packaging. In addition, the transparent packaging was perceived as more instrumental, less aesthetic, and less symbolic of quality than opaque packaging. Perceived aesthetics and symbolism, but not instrumentality, were documented to mediate this process. Analyzing packaging using the instrumentality, aesthetics, and symbolism model can help marketers and designers develop more effective packaging for various products, contexts, and consumer groups. The study views packaging as a critical marketing tool and not merely a logistic tool, and identifies one psychological mechanism that underlies the impact of packaging on purchase intentions. u00a9 2013 Copyright Taylor and Francis Group, LLC.”, “author” : { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Vilnai-Yavetz”, “given” : “Iris”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” }, { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Koren”, “given” : “Ran”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” } , “container-title” : “International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research”, “id” : “ITEM-1”, “issue” : “4”, “issued” : { “date-parts” : “2013” }, “page” : “394-417”, “title” : “Cutting through the clutter: Purchase intentions as a function of packaging instrumentality, aesthetics, and symbolism”, “type” : “article-journal”, “volume” : “23” }, “uris” : “http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=6f1678f5-b39c-46e9-8b25-b36822b6d665” } , “mendeley” : { “formattedCitation” : “(Vilnai-Yavetz & Koren, 2013)”, “manualFormatting” : “Vilnai-Yavetz & Koren (2013)”, “plainTextFormattedCitation” : “(Vilnai-Yavetz & Koren, 2013)”, “previouslyFormattedCitation” : “(Vilnai-Yavetz & Koren, 2013)” }, “properties” : { “noteIndex” : 15 }, “schema” : “https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json” }Vilnai-Yavetz ; Koren (2013), packaging should be perceived as effective, it should be seen as instrumental (because it protects the contents), aesthetic (it should have an attractive appearance), and symbolic (meaning that it communicates directly with the customers by sending them the desired message). Consequently, product packaging not only leads to consumer’s purchase intent, but it also increase companies’ market share and declines the promotional costs of the organization.
Findings suggest that 50% of grocery purchases are unplanned, meaning that the impulsive purchase intention have been increasing (Cobb and Heyer cited in ADDIN CSL_CITATION { “citationItems” : { “id” : “ITEM-1”, “itemData” : { “DOI” : “10.1108/10610420010316339”, “ISBN” : “10.1108/10610420010316339”, “ISSN” : “1061-0421”, “PMID” : “5492578”, “abstract” : “The verbal and visual components of package design”, “author” : { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Rettie”, “given” : “Ruth”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” }, { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Brewer”, “given” : “Carol”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” } , “container-title” : “Journal of Product & Brand Management”, “id” : “ITEM-1”, “issue” : “1”, “issued” : { “date-parts” : “2000” }, “page” : “56-70”, “title” : “The verbal and visual components of package design”, “type” : “article-journal”, “volume” : “9” }, “uris” : “http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=d1622987-0ff0-461d-ac8f-ba8db36df3af” } , “mendeley” : { “formattedCitation” : “(Rettie & Brewer, 2000)”, “manualFormatting” : “Rettie & Brewer, 2000)”, “plainTextFormattedCitation” : “(Rettie & Brewer, 2000)”, “previouslyFormattedCitation” : “(Rettie & Brewer, 2000)” }, “properties” : { “noteIndex” : 15 }, “schema” : “https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json” }Rettie ; Brewer, 2000).On the other hand, 90% of consumers make a purchase after only analysing the front side of the package, and 85% of consumers make their purchase without having picked up any alternative choice (Urbany et al., 1996). Due to the tendency to a unique weekly shop, and the large number of goods purchased at one shop, consumers spend less time to make the purchase decision and consequently the role of the packaging is becoming increasingly important at this point of the purchase ADDIN CSL_CITATION { “citationItems” : { “id” : “ITEM-1”, “itemData” : { “DOI” : “10.1108/10610420010316339”, “ISBN” : “10.1108/10610420010316339”, “ISSN” : “1061-0421”, “PMID” : “5492578”, “abstract” : “The verbal and visual components of package design”, “author” : { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Rettie”, “given” : “Ruth”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” }, { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Brewer”, “given” : “Carol”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” } , “container-title” : “Journal of Product & Brand Management”, “id” : “ITEM-1”, “issue” : “1”, “issued” : { “date-parts” : “2000” }, “page” : “56-70”, “title” : “The verbal and visual components of package design”, “type” : “article-journal”, “volume” : “9” }, “uris” : “http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=d1622987-0ff0-461d-ac8f-ba8db36df3af” } , “mendeley” : { “formattedCitation” : “(Rettie & Brewer, 2000)”, “plainTextFormattedCitation” : “(Rettie & Brewer, 2000)”, “previouslyFormattedCitation” : “(Rettie & Brewer, 2000)” }, “properties” : { “noteIndex” : 15 }, “schema” : “https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json” }(Rettie ; Brewer, 2000).

The pack design is the “salesman on the shelf” (Pilditch,1972 cited in ADDIN CSL_CITATION { “citationItems” : { “id” : “ITEM-1”, “itemData” : { “DOI” : “10.1108/10610420010316339”, “ISBN” : “10.1108/10610420010316339”, “ISSN” : “1061-0421”, “PMID” : “5492578”, “abstract” : “The verbal and visual components of package design”, “author” : { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Rettie”, “given” : “Ruth”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” }, { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Brewer”, “given” : “Carol”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” } , “container-title” : “Journal of Product & Brand Management”, “id” : “ITEM-1”, “issue” : “1”, “issued” : { “date-parts” : “2000” }, “page” : “56-70”, “title” : “The verbal and visual components of package design”, “type” : “article-journal”, “volume” : “9” }, “uris” : “http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=d1622987-0ff0-461d-ac8f-ba8db36df3af” } , “mendeley” : { “formattedCitation” : “(Rettie & Brewer, 2000)”, “manualFormatting” : “Rettie & Brewer, 2000)”, “plainTextFormattedCitation” : “(Rettie & Brewer, 2000)”, “previouslyFormattedCitation” : “(Rettie & Brewer, 2000)” }, “properties” : { “noteIndex” : 15 }, “schema” : “https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json” }Rettie ; Brewer, 2000); when consumers’ purchase decisions are made at the point of purchase, packaging has an heightened importance in comparison to other communication marketing tools because of its easy availability. For packaged goods that are not purchased in their final appearance, such as several food products, the consumer commonly relies on the package to elaborate an opinion on how the product looks like when in its ready-to-eat state ADDIN CSL_CITATION { “citationItems” : { “id” : “ITEM-1”, “itemData” : { “DOI” : “10.1080/10696679.2002.11501926”, “ISBN” : “10696679”, “ISSN” : “1069-6679”, “PMID” : “212185521”, “abstract” : “This paper examines the impact of product imagery (on packages) on consumers’ beliefs about the brand and their evaluations of both the brand and package. An empirical study using food products demonstrates that packages displaying a picture of the product can communicate information about the brand, and thus change brand beliefs. In addition, consumers who placed the most importance on these beliefs also had a better evaluation of the brand itself when its package included a product picture. This research thus provides evidence that consumers use packaging, an extrinsic cue, to infer intrinsic product attributes. In addition, consumers reported a more positive attitude toward the package itself when it included a product picture.”, “author” : { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Underwood”, “given” : “Robert L.”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” }, { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Klein”, “given” : “Noreen M.”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” } , “container-title” : “Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice”, “id” : “ITEM-1”, “issue” : “4”, “issued” : { “date-parts” : “2002” }, “page” : “58-68”, “title” : “Packaging as Brand Communication: Effects of Product Pictures on Consumer Responses to the Package and Brand”, “type” : “article-journal”, “volume” : “10” }, “uris” : “http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=9f6c351e-24f6-42a6-b466-234e841a8702” } , “mendeley” : { “formattedCitation” : “(Underwood ; Klein, 2002)”, “plainTextFormattedCitation” : “(Underwood ; Klein, 2002)”, “previouslyFormattedCitation” : “(Underwood ; Klein, 2002)” }, “properties” : { “noteIndex” : 16 }, “schema” : “https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json” }(Underwood & Klein, 2002). It is important to highlight that this communication tool must also be congruent with the image desired for the brand.

2.3 Elements of Packaging
Regarding the most important components of packaging, different opinions have been expressed relatively to the classification of packaging components in marketing literature.
According to Kotler (2003), there are six elements that must be evaluated by producers and designers when creating an efficient package: size, form, material, colour, text and brand. Silayoi and Speece (2004; 2007) and ADDIN CSL_CITATION { “citationItems” : { “id” : “ITEM-1”, “itemData” : { “DOI” : “10.1080/10696679.2003.11501933”, “ISBN” : “10696679”, “ISSN” : “1069-6679”, “PMID” : “212167557”, “abstract” : “Building on existing frameworks (customer-based brand equity, consumer-brand relationships, product symbolism/self concept), this paper forwards packaging as a product-related attribute critical to the creation and communication of brand identity. Packaging is posited to influence brand and self-identity via a dual resource base (mediated and lived experience); a conceptual positioning variant from the traditional single symbolic resource base (mediated experience) provided by advertising. This conceptual distinction is examined and data from an exploratory qualitative study are provided to illustrate the powerful role of packaging in communicating brand meaning and strengthening the consumer-brand relationship, especially for low involvement consumer nondurable products.”, “author” : { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Underwood”, “given” : “Robert L.”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” } , “container-title” : “Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice”, “id” : “ITEM-1”, “issue” : “1”, “issued” : { “date-parts” : “2003” }, “page” : “62-76”, “title” : “The Communicative Power of Product Packaging: Creating Brand Identity via Lived and Mediated Experience”, “type” : “article-journal”, “volume” : “11” }, “uris” : “http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=6a36dc3a-168e-4d98-9a91-c611ffdf216a” } , “mendeley” : { “formattedCitation” : “(Underwood, 2003)”, “plainTextFormattedCitation” : “(Underwood, 2003)”, “previouslyFormattedCitation” : “(Underwood, 2003)” }, “properties” : { “noteIndex” : 16 }, “schema” : “https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json” }(Underwood, 2003) distinguish package between two categories of elements: visual elements and informational elements. Visual elements refer to size and shape, graphics, colours, brand name and demonstrations of product performance, while informational elements relate to product information and technology. As stated by ADDIN CSL_CITATION { “citationItems” : { “id” : “ITEM-1”, “itemData” : { “author” : { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Silayoi”, “given” : “Pinya”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” }, { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Speece”, “given” : “Mark”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” } , “container-title” : “British Food Journal”, “id” : “ITEM-1”, “issue” : “8”, “issued” : { “date-parts” : “2004” }, “page” : “607-628”, “title” : “Packaging and purchase decisions Introduction : packaging at the point of sale The packaged food products market in Thailand”, “type” : “article-journal”, “volume” : “106” }, “uris” : “http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=319fc176-bf50-421f-aed5-2b060c543692” } , “mendeley” : { “formattedCitation” : “(P. Silayoi ; Speece, 2004)”, “manualFormatting” : “(Silayoi and Speece, 2004; 2007)”, “plainTextFormattedCitation” : “(P. Silayoi ; Speece, 2004)”, “previouslyFormattedCitation” : “(P. Silayoi ; Speece, 2004)” }, “properties” : { “noteIndex” : 16 }, “schema” : “https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json” }(Silayoi and Speece, 2004; 2007) visual elements are connected with the affective parts of consumers’ decision-making process, whereas informational elements are associated to the cognitive aspect of consumers’ decision-making process.

Nowadays, developments in packaging are increasingly enabling designers to put emphasis on the importance of visual elements of the package by adding transparent elements, which allow consumers to directly see the product before the purchase.

2.3.1 Visual Elements of PackagePackage design involves many elements, but this study will focus only on the visual elements of package, aiming at the understanding of the communicative effects on consumer evaluations and purchase decision-making of incorporating both transparent elements and/or a picture of the product on its package. As previously mentioned, the concept of visual elements of package is inherently multidimensional, including a combination of colours, fonts, package materials, pictorials, shapes and other elements that provide rich brand associations ADDIN CSL_CITATION { “citationItems” : { “id” : “ITEM-1”, “itemData” : { “DOI” : “10.1108/10610420110410531”, “ISBN” : “10610421”, “ISSN” : “1061-0421”, “PMID” : “220599584”, “abstract” : “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 shoppersu2019 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 consumersu2019 perceptions of the brand and enter the consideration set.”, “author” : { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Underwood”, “given” : “Robert L.”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” }, { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Klein”, “given” : “Noreen M.”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” }, { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Burke”, “given” : “Raymond R.”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” } , “container-title” : “Journal of Product ; Brand Management”, “id” : “ITEM-1”, “issue” : “7”, “issued” : { “date-parts” : “2001” }, “page” : “403-422”, “title” : “Packaging communication: attentional effects of product imagery”, “type” : “article-journal”, “volume” : “10” }, “uris” : “http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=deb57672-3f1e-4cea-bd30-314abef3788b” } , “mendeley” : { “formattedCitation” : “(Underwood et al., 2001)”, “plainTextFormattedCitation” : “(Underwood et al., 2001)”, “previouslyFormattedCitation” : “(Underwood et al., 2001)” }, “properties” : { “noteIndex” : 17 }, “schema” : “https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json” }(Underwood et al., 2001).

Under the light of ADDIN CSL_CITATION { “citationItems” : { “id” : “ITEM-1”, “itemData” : { “abstract” : “Conducted a study to replicate more directly the stimuli in the marketing environment by comparing package designs that include both visual and verbal components. In a pilot study, 25 undergraduates evaluated the package designs. 231 undergraduates participated in the main study. The effects of processing mode (imagery vs nonimagery) on consumer responses to visual and verbal package information were investigated. Three types of designs were compared including 1 that was verbally dominant and 2 that were visually dominant versions conveying brand attributes or the consumption experience. Brand attitudes, attitudes toward the package, and purchase intentions were affected by the interaction of the package design and processing mode. Imagery also generated more thoughts about abstract brand attributes than did nonimagery processing, especially for the visually dominant package design.”, “author” : { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Homer”, “given” : “Pamela M”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” }, { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Gauntt”, “given” : “Sandra G”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” } , “container-title” : “Journal of Mental Imagery”, “id” : “ITEM-1”, “issued” : { “date-parts” : “1992” }, “page” : “123-144”, “title” : “The Role of Imagery in the Processing of Visual and Verbal Package Information”, “type” : “article-journal”, “volume” : “16” }, “uris” : “http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=52a65426-56a4-4798-a5df-403fbeda9e0b” } , “mendeley” : { “formattedCitation” : “(Homer ; Gauntt, 1992)”, “plainTextFormattedCitation” : “(Homer ; Gauntt, 1992)”, “previouslyFormattedCitation” : “(Homer ; Gauntt, 1992)” }, “properties” : { “noteIndex” : 17 }, “schema” : “https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json” }(Homer & Gauntt, 1992) visual information on packages attracts consumers’ attention and creates expectations for the content of the verbal elements presented on product’s package. On the other hand, consumers whit limited time to dedicate to their shopping, further depend on extrinsic attributes when making their final purchase decision, specifically visual information (Wells et al., 2007). However, time pressure changes the search focus from visual elements with low information value to elements with high information value. Concerning food products, food imagery may also be able to enhance later perceptions of the food such as how it looks at the final state, smells or tastes, as well as increasing the probability for the shopper to purchase the product ADDIN CSL_CITATION { “citationItems” : { “id” : “ITEM-1”, “itemData” : { “DOI” : “10.1086/209082”, “ISBN” : “00935301”, “ISSN” : “0093-5301”, “PMID” : “4656740”, “abstract” : “Mental imagery is receiving increased attention in consumer behavior theory and research. This article describes imagery, characterizing it as a processing mode in which multisensory information is represented in a gestalt form in working memory, and discusses research on the unique effects of imagery at low levels of cognitive elaboration. It specifies researchable propositions for the relationship between high elaboration imagery processing and consumer choice and consumption behaviors. Finally, it reviews specific methods for studying imagery.”, “author” : { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “MacInnis”, “given” : “Deborah J.”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” }, { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Price”, “given” : “Linda L.”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” } , “container-title” : “Journal of Consumer Research”, “id” : “ITEM-1”, “issue” : “4”, “issued” : { “date-parts” : “1987” }, “page” : “473”, “title” : “The Role of Imagery in Information Processing: Review and Extensions”, “type” : “article-journal”, “volume” : “13” }, “uris” : “http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=70ba5a30-6af4-4466-b773-9017cff88938” } , “mendeley” : { “formattedCitation” : “(MacInnis ; Price, 1987)”, “plainTextFormattedCitation” : “(MacInnis ; Price, 1987)”, “previouslyFormattedCitation” : “(MacInnis ; Price, 1987)” }, “properties” : { “noteIndex” : 17 }, “schema” : “https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json” }(MacInnis & Price, 1987).

Packaging can enable the consumer to see the product contained within in one of two ways: either through images of the product printed on its package, or through transparency as an element of the packaging.

In hypothetical terms:
Hypothesis 1: Visual elements of package positively impacts purchase intent.

2.3.1.1 Visual Elements of Package: Product Imagery
Product imagery is “a process by which sensory information is represented in working memory” ADDIN CSL_CITATION { “citationItems” : { “id” : “ITEM-1”, “itemData” : { “DOI” : “10.1086/209082”, “ISBN” : “00935301”, “ISSN” : “0093-5301”, “PMID” : “4656740”, “abstract” : “Mental imagery is receiving increased attention in consumer behavior theory and research. This article describes imagery, characterizing it as a processing mode in which multisensory information is represented in a gestalt form in working memory, and discusses research on the unique effects of imagery at low levels of cognitive elaboration. It specifies researchable propositions for the relationship between high elaboration imagery processing and consumer choice and consumption behaviors. Finally, it reviews specific methods for studying imagery.”, “author” : { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “MacInnis”, “given” : “Deborah J.”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” }, { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Price”, “given” : “Linda L.”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” } , “container-title” : “Journal of Consumer Research”, “id” : “ITEM-1”, “issue” : “4”, “issued” : { “date-parts” : “1987” }, “page” : “473”, “title” : “The Role of Imagery in Information Processing: Review and Extensions”, “type” : “article-journal”, “volume” : “13” }, “uris” : “http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=70ba5a30-6af4-4466-b773-9017cff88938” } , “mendeley” : { “formattedCitation” : “(MacInnis ; Price, 1987)”, “plainTextFormattedCitation” : “(MacInnis ; Price, 1987)”, “previouslyFormattedCitation” : “(MacInnis ; Price, 1987)” }, “properties” : { “noteIndex” : 17 }, “schema” : “https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json” }(MacInnis & Price, 1987).

According to ADDIN CSL_CITATION { “citationItems” : { “id” : “ITEM-1”, “itemData” : { “DOI” : “http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/MRR-09-2015-0216”, “ISBN” : “0001253111116”, “ISSN” : “0264-0473”, “PMID” : “42012058”, “author” : { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Silayoi”, “given” : “Pinya and Speece Mark”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” } , “id” : “ITEM-1”, “issued” : { “date-parts” : “2007” }, “title” : “Article information :”, “type” : “book” }, “uris” : “http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=8b08e3f9-5d61-4bf8-ad4e-36275da00db5” } , “mendeley” : { “formattedCitation” : “(P. and S. M. Silayoi, 2007)”, “manualFormatting” : “(Silayoi and Speece, 2007)”, “plainTextFormattedCitation” : “(P. and S. M. Silayoi, 2007)”, “previouslyFormattedCitation” : “(P. and S. M. Silayoi, 2007)” }, “properties” : { “noteIndex” : 17 }, “schema” : “https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json” }(Silayoi and Speece, 2007) visual imagery on package is an essential attribute as can be a strategic method of differentiation and usually attracts more attention than verbal advertising. These effects are explained by the fact that people learn quicker and more efficiently when information is provided in pictures rather than words ADDIN CSL_CITATION { “citationItems” : { “id” : “ITEM-1”, “itemData” : { “DOI” : “10.1108/10610420110410531”, “ISBN” : “10610421”, “ISSN” : “1061-0421”, “PMID” : “220599584”, “abstract” : “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 shoppersu2019 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 consumersu2019 perceptions of the brand and enter the consideration set.”, “author” : { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Underwood”, “given” : “Robert L.”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” }, { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Klein”, “given” : “Noreen M.”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” }, { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Burke”, “given” : “Raymond R.”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” } , “container-title” : “Journal of Product ; Brand Management”, “id” : “ITEM-1”, “issue” : “7”, “issued” : { “date-parts” : “2001” }, “page” : “403-422”, “title” : “Packaging communication: attentional effects of product imagery”, “type” : “article-journal”, “volume” : “10” }, “uris” : “http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=af7cd8bc-2094-47cd-84ae-846a96061d8b” } , “mendeley” : { “formattedCitation” : “(Underwood et al., 2001)”, “plainTextFormattedCitation” : “(Underwood et al., 2001)”, “previouslyFormattedCitation” : “(Underwood et al., 2001)” }, “properties” : { “noteIndex” : 18 }, “schema” : “https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json” }(Underwood et al., 2001). An attractive product picture may also elicit positive and memorable product association with the product; as it enables consumers to spontaneously imagine aspects of how a product looks at its final form, tastes or smells in comparison with a package without product imagery ADDIN CSL_CITATION { “citationItems” : { “id” : “ITEM-1”, “itemData” : { “DOI” : “10.1108/10610420110410531”, “ISBN” : “10610421”, “ISSN” : “1061-0421”, “PMID” : “220599584”, “abstract” : “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 shoppersu2019 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 consumersu2019 perceptions of the brand and enter the consideration set.”, “author” : { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Underwood”, “given” : “Robert L.”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” }, { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Klein”, “given” : “Noreen M.”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” }, { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Burke”, “given” : “Raymond R.”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” } , “container-title” : “Journal of Product ; Brand Management”, “id” : “ITEM-1”, “issue” : “7”, “issued” : { “date-parts” : “2001” }, “page” : “403-422”, “title” : “Packaging communication: attentional effects of product imagery”, “type” : “article-journal”, “volume” : “10” }, “uris” : “http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=af7cd8bc-2094-47cd-84ae-846a96061d8b” } , “mendeley” : { “formattedCitation” : “(Underwood et al., 2001)”, “manualFormatting” : “(Underwood et al., 2001)”, “plainTextFormattedCitation” : “(Underwood et al., 2001)”, “previouslyFormattedCitation” : “(Underwood et al., 2001)” }, “properties” : { “noteIndex” : 18 }, “schema” : “https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json” }(Underwood et al., 2001). Therefore, product imagery positively impacts purchase decisions.
In addition, marketers and designers should be aware that visual imagery is not perceived by consumers as dishonest ADDIN CSL_CITATION { “citationItems” : { “id” : “ITEM-1”, “itemData” : { “DOI” : “10.1080/135272698345762”, “ISBN” : “1352726983457”, “ISSN” : “14664445”, “abstract” : “In this paper, an exploratory qualitative study of the communication between packages and consumers found a recurring theme of duplicity in consumers’ interpretations of product labelling and packaging. Therefore, a normative framework is proposed to guide the design of effective communication in product packaging. Based on Habermas’ theory of communicative competence, the framework suggests that a set of norms (i.e. the norm of truthfulness, the norm of sincerity, the norm of comprehensibility and the norm of legitimacy) can guide the complex task of designing good product packaging. By following these normative guidelines, marketers can both aggressively position their package to attract and promote, while concurrently avoiding package communication that may be construed as duplicitous. The theory provides a useful benchmark against which both public policy makers and manufacturers can evaluate the level of distortion in labelling and packaging. Consumers should benefit in terms of a clearer depiction of the product offering in the market-place. Marketers adopting these guidelines should benefit from a reduction in the level of package-generated consumer cynicism and an increased potential for enhanced long-term customer relationships.”, “author” : { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Underwood”, “given” : “Robert L.”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” }, { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Ozanne”, “given” : “Julie L.”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” } , “container-title” : “Journal of Marketing Communications”, “id” : “ITEM-1”, “issue” : “4”, “issued” : { “date-parts” : “1998” }, “page” : “207-220”, “title” : “Is your package an effective communicator? A normative framework for increasing the communicative competence of packaging”, “type” : “article-journal”, “volume” : “4” }, “uris” : “http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=c8357a64-cab4-485e-a4e0-283567d6f934” } , “mendeley” : { “formattedCitation” : “(Underwood ; Ozanne, 1998)”, “plainTextFormattedCitation” : “(Underwood ; Ozanne, 1998)”, “previouslyFormattedCitation” : “(Underwood ; Ozanne, 1998)” }, “properties” : { “noteIndex” : 18 }, “schema” : “https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json” }(Underwood & Ozanne, 1998). In addition to this improvement of product evaluations, product imagery has also been proven to increase purchase intentions ADDIN CSL_CITATION { “citationItems” : { “id” : “ITEM-1”, “itemData” : { “author” : { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Gofman”, “given” : “Alex”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” }, { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Moskowitz”, “given” : “Howard R”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” }, { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Fyrbjork”, “given” : “Johanna”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” }, { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Moskowitz”, “given” : “David”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” }, { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Mets”, “given” : “Tu00f5nis”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” }, { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Ave”, “given” : “Westchester”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” }, { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Plains”, “given” : “White”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” }, { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “York”, “given” : “New”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” } , “id” : “ITEM-1”, “issued” : { “date-parts” : “2009” }, “page” : “66-78”, “title” : “Extending Rule Developing Experimentation to Perception of Food Packages with Eye Tracking”, “type” : “article-journal” }, “uris” : “http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=cd574da2-bdc2-45d6-a2d0-c242786eebfa” } , “mendeley” : { “formattedCitation” : “(Gofman et al., 2009)”, “plainTextFormattedCitation” : “(Gofman et al., 2009)”, “previouslyFormattedCitation” : “(Gofman et al., 2009)” }, “properties” : { “noteIndex” : 18 }, “schema” : “https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json” }(Gofman et al., 2009).

Based on the above theories, the following Hypothesis is presented:
Hypothesis 1a: Including a picture of the product on package will positively affect purchase intent.

2.3.1.2 Visual Elements of Package: Presence of transparent elements on package
Rather than presenting an image of the product, it is becoming increasingly feasible to show the shopper exactly what’s inside the packaging by using transparent elements within the package. However, as relatively little is known about the effectiveness of transparent packaging as compared with product imagery, the scope of this study also to understand how the use of transparent elements on package can influence the consumer perceptions of the product and consequently its impact on purchase intention. Moreover, with the improvements in packaging technology of the last years, new opportunities for packaging design ADDIN CSL_CITATION { “citationItems” : { “id” : “ITEM-1”, “itemData” : { “DOI” : “10.1016/j.foodqual.2016.11.010”, “ISSN” : “09503293”, “abstract” : “Images of food constitute salient visual stimuli in the mind of the consumer. They are capable of promoting both feelings of hunger and the desire for food. It should not, then, come as any surprise that many product packages present the food contained within as a salient aspect of their visual design. Conventionally, this has been achieved primarily by the use of attractive visual imagery showing the product on the outside of the packaging. Nowadays, however, developments in packaging are increasingly enabling designers to add transparent elements, thus allowing consumers to directly see the product before purchase. Yet relatively little is known about the effectiveness of product imagery as compared with transparent packaging. In this review, we address the various ways in which seeing (images of) food influences the consumer. The implications for packaging designs which include: (a) images of food, and (b) transparent elements, are investigated. Guidelines are also provided for designers and brands on the ways in which to take advantage of these effects of being able to see the food.”, “author” : { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Simmonds”, “given” : “Gregory”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” }, { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Spence”, “given” : “Charles”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” } , “container-title” : “Food Quality and Preference”, “id” : “ITEM-1”, “issued” : { “date-parts” : “2017” }, “page” : “340-351”, “publisher” : “Elsevier Ltd”, “title” : “Thinking inside the box: How seeing products on, or through, the packaging influences consumer perceptions and purchase behaviour”, “type” : “article-journal”, “volume” : “62” }, “uris” : “http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=43d3ca10-1ce0-4626-b6ec-a7adf79221ec” } , “mendeley” : { “formattedCitation” : “(Simmonds ; Spence, 2017)”, “plainTextFormattedCitation” : “(Simmonds ; Spence, 2017)”, “previouslyFormattedCitation” : “(Simmonds ; Spence, 2017)” }, “properties” : { “noteIndex” : 18 }, “schema” : “https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json” }(Simmonds & Spence, 2017) allowing designers to add transparent elements into a wide range of product packaging and consequently allowing consumers to see the products through the packaging before purchase.
The prevalence of transparent elements in packaging appears to be on the rise, a trend that is set to continue (Mintel, 2014 cited by ADDIN CSL_CITATION { “citationItems” : { “id” : “ITEM-1”, “itemData” : { “DOI” : “10.1016/j.foodqual.2017.07.015”, “ISSN” : “0950-3293”, “author” : { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Simmonds”, “given” : “Gregory”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” }, { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Woods”, “given” : “Andy T”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” }, { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Spence”, “given” : “Charles”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” } , “container-title” : “Food Quality and Preference”, “id” : “ITEM-1”, “issue” : “January 2017”, “issued” : { “date-parts” : “2018” }, “page” : “18-27”, “publisher” : “Elsevier”, “title” : “u2018 Show me the goods u2019 : Assessing the e ff ectiveness of transparent packaging vs . product imagery on product evaluation”, “type” : “article-journal”, “volume” : “63” }, “uris” : “http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=d1b7f39d-3fef-40b9-baf2-f23299b0268f” } , “mendeley” : { “formattedCitation” : “(Simmonds, Woods, ; Spence, 2018)”, “manualFormatting” : “Simmonds et al., 2018)”, “plainTextFormattedCitation” : “(Simmonds, Woods, ; Spence, 2018)”, “previouslyFormattedCitation” : “(Simmonds, Woods, ; Spence, 2018)” }, “properties” : { “noteIndex” : 18 }, “schema” : “https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json” }Simmonds et al., 2018). Following ADDIN CSL_CITATION { “citationItems” : { “id” : “ITEM-1”, “itemData” : { “DOI” : “10.1509/”, “author” : { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Deng”, “given” : “Xiaoyan”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” }, { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Srinivasan”, “given” : “Raji”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” } , “id” : “ITEM-1”, “issue” : “September”, “issued” : { “date-parts” : “2013” }, “page” : “4”, “title” : “Increase or Decrease”, “type” : “article-journal”, “volume” : “77” }, “uris” : “http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=dc99e6fa-b40a-4cc4-ba97-b287f3b4a084” } , “mendeley” : { “formattedCitation” : “(Deng ; Srinivasan, 2013)”, “manualFormatting” : “Deng ; Srinivasan (2013)”, “plainTextFormattedCitation” : “(Deng ; Srinivasan, 2013)”, “previouslyFormattedCitation” : “(Deng ; Srinivasan, 2013)” }, “properties” : { “noteIndex” : 18 }, “schema” : “https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json” }Deng & Srinivasan (2013) theory, transparency is present in between 20% to 77% of all packaging, depending on product category (20% of chips, 20% of cookies, 23% of crackers, 77% of nuts).

Following Billeter, Zhu, and Inman’s (2012) attribution theory, transparent packaging leads to greater purchase intent as the products are perceived as more trustworthy when compared to the exact same products presented in non-transparent packaging. In other words, the use of transparent elements on package can lead to an increase in purchase intent, in the perception of brand transparency and product’s quality.

It is important to highlight that when the consumer can see through the package, the evaluation is declared to be functional instead of symbolic, as it is not based on associations elicited by graphical elements on the packaging, but it is based the actual appearance and texture of the product to drive this evaluation ADDIN CSL_CITATION { “citationItems” : { “id” : “ITEM-1”, “itemData” : { “DOI” : “10.1108/03090560910923300”, “ISBN” : “03090566”, “ISSN” : “0309-0566”, “PMID” : “37196089”, “abstract” : “Purpose – This study sets out to explore how consumers evaluate unbranded and unlabelled food products and to what extent they are able to select the products with the highest potential to meet their expectations regarding eating quality. Design/methodology/approach – The study focused on Portuguese consumers and their purchase of bacalhau, i.e. salted and dried cod, which is sold unpacked, unbranded and unlabelled in supermarkets. The collection of data encompassed observations of shoppers in supermarkets, individual interviews and focus groups with consumers, and a consumer panel that conducted quality assessments and rankings of nine different bacalhaus and subsequent taste assessments of the same products following desalting and cooking. Findings – Results indicate that Portuguese consumers – in spite of substantial experience with buying, preparing and consuming bacalhau – are uncertain in their in-store quality assessment. Shoppers used multiple criteria to assess the quality of the bacalhau, such as the appearance and dryness of the product. Some rather curious quality criteria that were not related to “objective” product quality were also discerned. Touching the dried and salted cod trying to “feel” the quality was common. Some even broke the fish tail to assess the dryness. Findings from the consumer panel showed large discrepancies between how the same products were assessed before and after desalting and cooking. Research limitations/implications – The study is limited to one food product and one national market. Marketing implications, such as focus on packaging, quality labelling, and branding are discussed, as well as implications for future research. Originality/value – The paper shows that although unlabelled and unbranded food products are common, relatively little research addressing how consumers assess such products in a wider sense, including which strategies consumers apply and to what extent they are able to select products that meet or exceed their expectations regarding eating quality, has been conducted. The paper also addresses the role cultural rules and rituals may play in the assessment of traditional food products such as bacalhau. ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR Copyright of European Journal of Marketing is the property of Emerald Group Publishing Limited and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder’s express written permission. However, users may print, downlou2026″, “author” : { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Sognu2010Grundvu00e5g”, “given” : “Geir”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” }, { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “u00d8stli”, “given” : “Jens”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” } , “container-title” : “European Journal of Marketing”, “id” : “ITEM-1”, “issue” : “1/2”, “issued” : { “date-parts” : “2009” }, “page” : “213-228”, “title” : “Consumer evaluation of unbranded and unlabelled food products”, “type” : “article-journal”, “volume” : “43” }, “uris” : “http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=caa10d00-eb59-4dcc-9cd5-141a3c541173” } , “mendeley” : { “formattedCitation” : “(Sognu2010Grundvu00e5g & u00d8stli, 2009)”, “plainTextFormattedCitation” : “(Sognu2010Grundvu00e5g & u00d8stli, 2009)”, “previouslyFormattedCitation” : “(Sognu2010Grundvu00e5g & u00d8stli, 2009)” }, “properties” : { “noteIndex” : 19 }, “schema” : “https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json” }(Sogn?Grundvåg & Østli, 2009).

Hypothesis 1b: The presence of transparent elements on package positively impacts purchase intent.

A transparent window on product packaging, when compared to just a printed graphic of the product on-pack, can lead to increased willingness to purchase through a variety of means differing by product category ADDIN CSL_CITATION { “citationItems” : { “id” : “ITEM-1”, “itemData” : { “DOI” : “10.1016/j.foodqual.2016.11.010”, “ISSN” : “09503293”, “abstract” : “Images of food constitute salient visual stimuli in the mind of the consumer. They are capable of promoting both feelings of hunger and the desire for food. It should not, then, come as any surprise that many product packages present the food contained within as a salient aspect of their visual design. Conventionally, this has been achieved primarily by the use of attractive visual imagery showing the product on the outside of the packaging. Nowadays, however, developments in packaging are increasingly enabling designers to add transparent elements, thus allowing consumers to directly see the product before purchase. Yet relatively little is known about the effectiveness of product imagery as compared with transparent packaging. In this review, we address the various ways in which seeing (images of) food influences the consumer. The implications for packaging designs which include: (a) images of food, and (b) transparent elements, are investigated. Guidelines are also provided for designers and brands on the ways in which to take advantage of these effects of being able to see the food.”, “author” : { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Simmonds”, “given” : “Gregory”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” }, { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Spence”, “given” : “Charles”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” } , “container-title” : “Food Quality and Preference”, “id” : “ITEM-1”, “issued” : { “date-parts” : “2017” }, “page” : “340-351”, “publisher” : “Elsevier Ltd”, “title” : “Thinking inside the box: How seeing products on, or through, the packaging influences consumer perceptions and purchase behaviour”, “type” : “article-journal”, “volume” : “62” }, “uris” : “http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=43d3ca10-1ce0-4626-b6ec-a7adf79221ec” } , “mendeley” : { “formattedCitation” : “(Simmonds & Spence, 2017)”, “plainTextFormattedCitation” : “(Simmonds & Spence, 2017)”, “previouslyFormattedCitation” : “(Simmonds & Spence, 2017)” }, “properties” : { “noteIndex” : 19 }, “schema” : “https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json” }(Simmonds & Spence, 2017). This effect would be explained by the fact that being able to see the product directly (through a transparent window on package) would make the product more salient ADDIN CSL_CITATION { “citationItems” : { “id” : “ITEM-1”, “itemData” : { “DOI” : “10.1509/”, “author” : { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Deng”, “given” : “Xiaoyan”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” }, { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Srinivasan”, “given” : “Raji”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” } , “id” : “ITEM-1”, “issue” : “September”, “issued” : { “date-parts” : “2013” }, “page” : “4”, “title” : “Increase or Decrease”, “type” : “article-journal”, “volume” : “77” }, “uris” : “http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=dc99e6fa-b40a-4cc4-ba97-b287f3b4a084” } , “mendeley” : { “formattedCitation” : “(Deng & Srinivasan, 2013)”, “plainTextFormattedCitation” : “(Deng & Srinivasan, 2013)”, “previouslyFormattedCitation” : “(Deng & Srinivasan, 2013)” }, “properties” : { “noteIndex” : 19 }, “schema” : “https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json” }(Deng & Srinivasan, 2013) when compared to a printed graphic of the product on the packaging.

Hypothesis 1c: The inclusion of an image of the product on package will stimulate lower purchase intentions than the inclusion of a transparent element on package.

2.4 Purchase IntentPurchase intent can be defined as the likelihood that a consumer will purchase a specific product (Morrison,1979) and it depends on the extent to which consumers believe that product will satisfy their wants and needs (Kupiec and Revell, 2001). However, consumers’ decision-making process is becoming more complex as they have several similar products within the same category and they are affected by internal or external motivations during the buying process.
Purchase intentions have been applied in the several articles and studies for predicting actual purchase. Several authors, mentioned in this dissertation, who have studied visual elements of package with emphases on the presence or absence either of transparent elements or images of the product on its package, have used purchase intent construct.

2.5. Perceived Purchase RiskAs declared by ADDIN CSL_CITATION { “citationItems” : { “id” : “ITEM-1”, “itemData” : { “DOI” : “10.1016/j.ausmj.2011.10.014”, “ISBN” : “1441-3582”, “ISSN” : “14413582”, “abstract” : “While international retailers engage in the active promotion of store brands, consumers from Asia-Pacific markets remain resistant to purchasing store brands despite the intensification of promotional efforts. This study extends previous store brand research by: (1) determining the mediating role of perceived quality within a model of the antecedents and consequences of quality; and (2) assessing the extent to which age moderates the strength of relationships posited in the model. The model was tested in a retail store brand context using a quota sample of 220 shoppers and a cross-sectional survey. Empirical results suggest that performance risk, physical risk, and familiarity have significant effects on both perceived quality and purchase intention. Familiarity had the strongest total effect on perceived quality and store brand proneness in a collectivistic culture such as Malaysia and its effect on store brand proneness was partially mediated by perceived quality. Lastly, the finding that age moderates the impact of performance risk, physical risk, familiarity and perceived quality on store brand proneness provides insights into store brand management. u00a9 2011 Australian and New Zealand Marketing Academy.”, “author” : { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Sheau-Fen”, “given” : “Yap”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” }, { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Sun-May”, “given” : “Leong”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” }, { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Yu-Ghee”, “given” : “Wee”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” } , “container-title” : “Australasian Marketing Journal”, “id” : “ITEM-1”, “issue” : “1”, “issued” : { “date-parts” : “2012” }, “page” : “48-58”, “publisher” : “Australian and New Zealand Marketing Academy.”, “title” : “Store brand proneness: Effects of perceived risks, quality and familiarity”, “type” : “article-journal”, “volume” : “20” }, “uris” : “http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=b74073c9-918c-46a5-bff9-7ec5f2d6719c” } , “mendeley” : { “formattedCitation” : “(Sheau-Fen, Sun-May, & Yu-Ghee, 2012)”, “manualFormatting” : “(Sheau-Fen et al.,2012)”, “plainTextFormattedCitation” : “(Sheau-Fen, Sun-May, & Yu-Ghee, 2012)”, “previouslyFormattedCitation” : “(Sheau-Fen, Sun-May, & Yu-Ghee, 2012)” }, “properties” : { “noteIndex” : 20 }, “schema” : “https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json” }(Sheau-Fen et al.,2012), the act of purchase is a function of the degree of perceived risk associated with a specific product category and usually consumers have a tendency to be risk averse towards purchase decisions ADDIN CSL_CITATION { “citationItems” : { “id” : “ITEM-1”, “itemData” : { “author” : { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Batra”, “given” : “Rajeev”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” } , “id” : “ITEM-1”, “issue” : “2”, “issued” : { “date-parts” : “2000” }, “page” : “175-191”, “title” : “Consumer-Level Factors Moderating The Success Of Private Label Brands”, “type” : “article-journal”, “volume” : “76” }, “uris” : “http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=b1ae0c10-99ed-46f7-a015-69a5990e9a4c” } , “mendeley” : { “formattedCitation” : “(Batra, 2000)”, “manualFormatting” : “(Batra and Sinha, 2000)”, “plainTextFormattedCitation” : “(Batra, 2000)”, “previouslyFormattedCitation” : “(Batra, 2000)” }, “properties” : { “noteIndex” : 20 }, “schema” : “https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json” }(Batra and Sinha, 2000). Moreover, consumer intention to purchase depends on the degree to which consumers expect that the product can satisfy their expectations about its use (Kupiec and Revell, 2001).

Perceived risk is one of the most important factors in order to understand consumer behaviour (Bettman, 1973) and it is fundamental for researchers in order to clarify consumers’ perceptions of the uncertainty and adverse consequences of a purchase decision of a product or service. Literature suggests that one of the determinants of the level of perceived risk is the “degree of inconvenience of making a mistake” ADDIN CSL_CITATION { “citationItems” : { “id” : “ITEM-1”, “itemData” : { “author” : { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Batra”, “given” : “Rajeev”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” } , “id” : “ITEM-1”, “issue” : “2”, “issued” : { “date-parts” : “2000” }, “page” : “175-191”, “title” : “Consumer-Level Factors Moderating The Success Of Private Label Brands”, “type” : “article-journal”, “volume” : “76” }, “uris” : “http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=b1ae0c10-99ed-46f7-a015-69a5990e9a4c” } , “mendeley” : { “formattedCitation” : “(Batra, 2000)”, “manualFormatting” : “(Batra and Sinha, 2000)”, “plainTextFormattedCitation” : “(Batra, 2000)”, “previouslyFormattedCitation” : “(Batra, 2000)” }, “properties” : { “noteIndex” : 20 }, “schema” : “https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json” }(Batra and Sinha, 2000). The perceived risk is frequent to new product purchase and can comprise perceived functional risk, perceived financial risk, psychological risk, physical risk and also social risk (Bhukya & Singh, 2015).
Although, there are five types of perceived risks, social risk and physical risk were not considered for this study as packaged products are typically used at home so they are not highly visible to others. On the other hand, physical and functional risks are the same thing regarding groceries as in the case that a specific product does not function properly; it could damage consumers´ health (Semeijn et al., 2004).
Previous studies have concluded that visual elements of package impact how shoppers perceived product’s quality and also allow direct comparison among products. Therefore, perceived value has significantly influence on purchase intention of food products ADDIN CSL_CITATION { “citationItems” : { “id” : “ITEM-1”, “itemData” : { “DOI” : “10.1016/j.foodqual.2016.11.010”, “ISSN” : “09503293”, “abstract” : “Images of food constitute salient visual stimuli in the mind of the consumer. They are capable of promoting both feelings of hunger and the desire for food. It should not, then, come as any surprise that many product packages present the food contained within as a salient aspect of their visual design. Conventionally, this has been achieved primarily by the use of attractive visual imagery showing the product on the outside of the packaging. Nowadays, however, developments in packaging are increasingly enabling designers to add transparent elements, thus allowing consumers to directly see the product before purchase. Yet relatively little is known about the effectiveness of product imagery as compared with transparent packaging. In this review, we address the various ways in which seeing (images of) food influences the consumer. The implications for packaging designs which include: (a) images of food, and (b) transparent elements, are investigated. Guidelines are also provided for designers and brands on the ways in which to take advantage of these effects of being able to see the food.”, “author” : { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Simmonds”, “given” : “Gregory”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” }, { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Spence”, “given” : “Charles”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” } , “container-title” : “Food Quality and Preference”, “id” : “ITEM-1”, “issued” : { “date-parts” : “2017” }, “page” : “340-351”, “publisher” : “Elsevier Ltd”, “title” : “Thinking inside the box: How seeing products on, or through, the packaging influences consumer perceptions and purchase behaviour”, “type” : “article-journal”, “volume” : “62” }, “uris” : “http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=43d3ca10-1ce0-4626-b6ec-a7adf79221ec” } , “mendeley” : { “formattedCitation” : “(Simmonds & Spence, 2017)”, “plainTextFormattedCitation” : “(Simmonds & Spence, 2017)”, “previouslyFormattedCitation” : “(Simmonds & Spence, 2017)” }, “properties” : { “noteIndex” : 20 }, “schema” : “https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json” }(Simmonds ; Spence, 2017).

Both types of packaging either transparent or non-transparent packaging, communicate a message, however the crucial question is: which of the two packaging options better communicate and transmit the desired message of quality and trust?
Transparent packaging can influence consumer’s perceptions of perceived risk as it can lead to an increase in product trust and perceived product quality as it allows shoppers to evaluate the product by its appearance and consequently reduce the perceived uncertainty regarding product quality (Sogn-Grundvag and Østli 2009) which leads to higher purchase intentions. This effect can also be explained by the fact that one of the determinants of purchase intention is confidence, which is the opposite of perceived risk ADDIN CSL_CITATION { “citationItems” : { “id” : “ITEM-1”, “itemData” : { “DOI” : “10.1002/mar.20080”, “ISBN” : “1520-6793”, “ISSN” : “07426046”, “PMID” : “17719987”, “abstract” : “Because the Internet purchase of apparel is risky, there is a strong need to develop better visual product presentation on-line that may give some sense of fit and other tactile experience to reduce per- ceived risk and create pleasurable shopping experiences. Toward this end, the effect of product presentation on consumer responses was examined here. In addition, the relationships among variables were investigated to provide details of the nature of the effect of product presentation. This study employed a 2ue0012 between-subjects factorial design: product movement (product in motion vs. product not in motion)ue001image size (large vs. small). Mock Web sites were created to closely mimic the design of actual Web sites. Two hundred forty-four female undergraduates logged on and evaluated two pairs of pants under the same treatment conditions. The present research showed (a) main effects for product movement on mood, perceived risk, and apparel purchase intention; (b) an interaction between product move- ment and image size on apparel purchase intention; (c) a negative relationship between mood and perceived risk; (d) a positive relation-ship between mood and apparel purchase intention; (e) a negative relationship between perceived risk and apparel purchase intention; and (f) mediating relationships among variables. Based on the results, apparel e-tailers are advised to create positive mood using product rotation to decrease shoppersu2019 perceived risk and increase purchase intent.”, “author” : { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Park”, “given” : “Jihye”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” }, { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Lennon”, “given” : “Sharron J.”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” }, { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Stoel”, “given” : “Leslie”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” } , “container-title” : “Psychology and Marketing”, “id” : “ITEM-1”, “issue” : “9”, “issued” : { “date-parts” : “2005” }, “page” : “695-719”, “title” : “On-line product presentation: Effects on mood, perceived risk, and purchase intention”, “type” : “article-journal”, “volume” : “22” }, “uris” : “http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=66fbfb5a-b7b2-4111-afd4-75c66febfab5” } , “mendeley” : { “formattedCitation” : “(Park, Lennon, & Stoel, 2005)”, “plainTextFormattedCitation” : “(Park, Lennon, & Stoel, 2005)”, “previouslyFormattedCitation” : “(Park, Lennon, & Stoel, 2005)” }, “properties” : { “noteIndex” : 21 }, “schema” : “https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json” }(Park, Lennon, & Stoel, 2005).
On the other hand, the interest of this dissertation on imagery processing is related to its effect on beliefs about the product which influences the perceived purchase risk. Following, ADDIN CSL_CITATION { “citationItems” : { “id” : “ITEM-1”, “itemData” : { “DOI” : “10.1080/10696679.2002.11501926”, “ISBN” : “10696679”, “ISSN” : “1069-6679”, “PMID” : “212185521”, “abstract” : “This paper examines the impact of product imagery (on packages) on consumers’ beliefs about the brand and their evaluations of both the brand and package. An empirical study using food products demonstrates that packages displaying a picture of the product can communicate information about the brand, and thus change brand beliefs. In addition, consumers who placed the most importance on these beliefs also had a better evaluation of the brand itself when its package included a product picture. This research thus provides evidence that consumers use packaging, an extrinsic cue, to infer intrinsic product attributes. In addition, consumers reported a more positive attitude toward the package itself when it included a product picture.”, “author” : { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Underwood”, “given” : “Robert L.”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” }, { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Klein”, “given” : “Noreen M.”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” } , “container-title” : “Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice”, “id” : “ITEM-1”, “issue” : “4”, “issued” : { “date-parts” : “2002” }, “page” : “58-68”, “title” : “Packaging as Brand Communication: Effects of Product Pictures on Consumer Responses to the Package and Brand”, “type” : “article-journal”, “volume” : “10” }, “uris” : “http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=9f6c351e-24f6-42a6-b466-234e841a8702” } , “mendeley” : { “formattedCitation” : “(Underwood ; Klein, 2002)”, “plainTextFormattedCitation” : “(Underwood ; Klein, 2002)”, “previouslyFormattedCitation” : “(Underwood ; Klein, 2002)” }, “properties” : { “noteIndex” : 21 }, “schema” : “https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json” }(Underwood & Klein, 2002) attribution theory, the product image performs an informational function that directly impacts consumer beliefs about the product which directly affect consumer’s perceived purchase risk, especially in categories for highly experiential products such as food products.

Hypothesis 2a: There is a negative relationship between perceived functional risk and transparent packaging
Hypothesis 2b: There is a negative relationship between perceived functional risk and product imagery
2.5.1 Perceived functional riskMany empirical studies described functional risk as the uncertainty that the outcome of a product purchase will not encounter consumer’s expectations (Bhukya and Singh, 2015). Accordingly, when the provided product information is limited and consumers have a low level of self-confidence in their brand evaluation, the perceived risk is higher (Bhatnagar and Ghose, 2004 cited by ADDIN CSL_CITATION { “citationItems” : { “id” : “ITEM-1”, “itemData” : { “DOI” : “10.1016/j.jretconser.2015.11.007”, “ISBN” : “0969-6989”, “ISSN” : “09696989”, “abstract” : “Despite the rapid increase in online shopping, the literature is silent in terms of the interrelationship between perceived risk factors, the marketing impacts, and their influence on product and web-vendor consumer trust. This research focuses on holidaymakers’ perspectives using Internet bookings for their holidays. The findings reveal the associations between Internet perceived risks and the relatively equal influence of product and e-channel risks in consumers’ trust, and that online purchasing intentions are equally influenced by product and e-channel consumer trust. They also illustrate the relationship between marketing strategies and perceived risks, and provide managerial suggestions for further e-purchasing tourism improvement.”, “author” : { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Pappas”, “given” : “Nikolaos”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” } , “container-title” : “Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services”, “id” : “ITEM-1”, “issued” : { “date-parts” : “2016” }, “page” : “92-103”, “publisher” : “Elsevier”, “title” : “Marketing strategies, perceived risks, and consumer trust in online buying behaviour”, “type” : “article-journal”, “volume” : “29” }, “uris” : “http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=c0da5b25-ed95-470d-b815-fd41cba50cf2” } , “mendeley” : { “formattedCitation” : “(Pappas, 2016)”, “manualFormatting” : “Pappas, 2016)”, “plainTextFormattedCitation” : “(Pappas, 2016)”, “previouslyFormattedCitation” : “(Pappas, 2016)” }, “properties” : { “noteIndex” : 21 }, “schema” : “https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json” }Pappas, 2016) as there is more ambiguity with intrinsic attributes and, consequently higher level of uncertainty of the quality and the functionality of the product (Erdem and Swait, 2004). According to Underwood and Klein (2002), showing food visuals of the product on package lead to higher consumer’s expectations that the product tastes better than when no food visuals are displayed.

2.5.2 Perceived financial riskFinancial risk is defined as “the likelihood of suffering a financial loss due to any hidden costs, maintenance costs or replacement cost due to the lack of warrantee and a faulty product” (Kiang et al.,2011 cited by ADDIN CSL_CITATION { “citationItems” : { “id” : “ITEM-1”, “itemData” : { “DOI” : “10.1016/j.jretconser.2015.11.007”, “ISBN” : “0969-6989”, “ISSN” : “09696989”, “abstract” : “Despite the rapid increase in online shopping, the literature is silent in terms of the interrelationship between perceived risk factors, the marketing impacts, and their influence on product and web-vendor consumer trust. This research focuses on holidaymakers’ perspectives using Internet bookings for their holidays. The findings reveal the associations between Internet perceived risks and the relatively equal influence of product and e-channel risks in consumers’ trust, and that online purchasing intentions are equally influenced by product and e-channel consumer trust. They also illustrate the relationship between marketing strategies and perceived risks, and provide managerial suggestions for further e-purchasing tourism improvement.”, “author” : { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Pappas”, “given” : “Nikolaos”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” } , “container-title” : “Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services”, “id” : “ITEM-1”, “issued” : { “date-parts” : “2016” }, “page” : “92-103”, “publisher” : “Elsevier”, “title” : “Marketing strategies, perceived risks, and consumer trust in online buying behaviour”, “type” : “article-journal”, “volume” : “29” }, “uris” : “http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=c0da5b25-ed95-470d-b815-fd41cba50cf2” } , “mendeley” : { “formattedCitation” : “(Pappas, 2016)”, “manualFormatting” : “Pappas, 2016)”, “plainTextFormattedCitation” : “(Pappas, 2016)”, “previouslyFormattedCitation” : “(Pappas, 2016)” }, “properties” : { “noteIndex” : 22 }, “schema” : “https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json” }Pappas, 2016). It is also described as the perception of the likelihood that the product is not worth the price that consumers paid for it ADDIN CSL_CITATION { “citationItems” : { “id” : “ITEM-1”, “itemData” : { “DOI” : “10.1509/jmkg.69.2.114.60762”, “ISBN” : “00222429”, “ISSN” : “0022-2429”, “PMID” : “16736069”, “abstract” : “In this article, the authors examine consumersu2019 behavior with respect to expiration dates for grocery store perish- able products. A better understanding of such behavior can both guide efforts to educate consumers about the risks associated with perishables that are approaching their expiration dates and help managers implement effec- tive promotional strategies for these products throughout the course of their shelf lives. Both of these approaches can help reduce waste due to spoilage.”, “author” : { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Tsiros”, “given” : “Michael”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” }, { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Heilman”, “given” : “Carrie M.”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” } , “container-title” : “Journal of Marketing”, “id” : “ITEM-1”, “issue” : “2”, “issued” : { “date-parts” : “2005” }, “page” : “114-129”, “title” : “The Effect of Expiration Dates and Perceived Risk on Purchasing Behavior in Grocery Store Perishable Categories”, “type” : “article-journal”, “volume” : “69” }, “uris” : “http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=f2246966-6890-4a0a-87ee-cd4a0652f83f” } , “mendeley” : { “formattedCitation” : “(Tsiros ; Heilman, 2005)”, “plainTextFormattedCitation” : “(Tsiros ; Heilman, 2005)”, “previouslyFormattedCitation” : “(Tsiros ; Heilman, 2005)” }, “properties” : { “noteIndex” : 22 }, “schema” : “https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json” }(Tsiros & Heilman, 2005). According to ADDIN CSL_CITATION { “citationItems” : { “id” : “ITEM-1”, “itemData” : { “DOI” : “10.1016/j.jretconser.2015.11.007”, “ISBN” : “0969-6989”, “ISSN” : “09696989”, “abstract” : “Despite the rapid increase in online shopping, the literature is silent in terms of the interrelationship between perceived risk factors, the marketing impacts, and their influence on product and web-vendor consumer trust. This research focuses on holidaymakers’ perspectives using Internet bookings for their holidays. The findings reveal the associations between Internet perceived risks and the relatively equal influence of product and e-channel risks in consumers’ trust, and that online purchasing intentions are equally influenced by product and e-channel consumer trust. They also illustrate the relationship between marketing strategies and perceived risks, and provide managerial suggestions for further e-purchasing tourism improvement.”, “author” : { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Pappas”, “given” : “Nikolaos”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” } , “container-title” : “Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services”, “id” : “ITEM-1”, “issued” : { “date-parts” : “2016” }, “page” : “92-103”, “publisher” : “Elsevier”, “title” : “Marketing strategies, perceived risks, and consumer trust in online buying behaviour”, “type” : “article-journal”, “volume” : “29” }, “uris” : “http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=c0da5b25-ed95-470d-b815-fd41cba50cf2” } , “mendeley” : { “formattedCitation” : “(Pappas, 2016)”, “plainTextFormattedCitation” : “(Pappas, 2016)”, “previouslyFormattedCitation” : “(Pappas, 2016)” }, “properties” : { “noteIndex” : 22 }, “schema” : “https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json” }(Pappas, 2016) this last definition can be extended to the risk that the product’s quality is not equivalent with its price. In addition, consumer’s price-quality schema of the product is a key factor in perceived financial risk and it is described as “the generalised belief across product categories that the level of the price cue is related positively to the quality level of the product” (Lichtenstein et al., 1993 cited by ADDIN CSL_CITATION { “citationItems” : { “id” : “ITEM-1”, “itemData” : { “DOI” : “10.1016/j.jretconser.2015.11.007”, “ISBN” : “0969-6989”, “ISSN” : “09696989”, “abstract” : “Despite the rapid increase in online shopping, the literature is silent in terms of the interrelationship between perceived risk factors, the marketing impacts, and their influence on product and web-vendor consumer trust. This research focuses on holidaymakers’ perspectives using Internet bookings for their holidays. The findings reveal the associations between Internet perceived risks and the relatively equal influence of product and e-channel risks in consumers’ trust, and that online purchasing intentions are equally influenced by product and e-channel consumer trust. They also illustrate the relationship between marketing strategies and perceived risks, and provide managerial suggestions for further e-purchasing tourism improvement.”, “author” : { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Pappas”, “given” : “Nikolaos”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” } , “container-title” : “Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services”, “id” : “ITEM-1”, “issued” : { “date-parts” : “2016” }, “page” : “92-103”, “publisher” : “Elsevier”, “title” : “Marketing strategies, perceived risks, and consumer trust in online buying behaviour”, “type” : “article-journal”, “volume” : “29” }, “uris” : “http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=c0da5b25-ed95-470d-b815-fd41cba50cf2” } , “mendeley” : { “formattedCitation” : “(Pappas, 2016)”, “manualFormatting” : “Pappas, 2016)”, “plainTextFormattedCitation” : “(Pappas, 2016)”, “previouslyFormattedCitation” : “(Pappas, 2016)” }, “properties” : { “noteIndex” : 22 }, “schema” : “https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json” }Pappas, 2016) , which means that consumers use price to evaluate product’s quality which as a direct impact on perceived risk and consequently an impact on purchase intent.

2.5.3 Perceived psychological riskPsychological risk can be defined as the state of consumer’s disappointment when they make a wrong purchase decision by buying a poor product or service and it is associated to consumer’s dissatisfaction with owning or using those products (Ueltschy el al. (2004) cited by Bhukya and Singh (2015). A product’s image on package can increase consumer self-evaluations and consequently increase the likelihood that consumers will use the image as a product-quality indicator ADDIN CSL_CITATION { “citationItems” : { “id” : “ITEM-1”, “itemData” : { “DOI” : “10.1016/j.jretai.2016.12.002”, “ISSN” : “00224359”, “abstract” : “Packaging is a critical aspect of the marketing offer, with many implications for the multi-sensory customer experience. It can affect attention, comprehension of value, perception of product functionality, and also consumption, with important consequences for consumer experience and response. Thus, while it was once viewed as being useful only for product preservation and logistics, package design has evolved into a key marketing tool. We introduce the layered-packaging taxonomy that highlights new ways to think about product packaging. This taxonomy has two dimensions: the physicality dimension, which is composed of the outeru2013intermediateu2013inner packaging layers, and the functionality dimension, which is composed of the purchaseu2013consumption packaging layers. We then build on this taxonomy to present an integrative conceptualization of the sensory aspects of package design as they affect key stages of customer experience.”, “author” : { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Krishna”, “given” : “Aradhna”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” }, { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Cian”, “given” : “Luca”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” }, { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Aydu0131nou011flu”, “given” : “Nilu00fcfer Z.”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” } , “container-title” : “Journal of Retailing”, “id” : “ITEM-1”, “issue” : “1”, “issued” : { “date-parts” : “2017” }, “page” : “43-54”, “title” : “Sensory Aspects of Package Design”, “type” : “article-journal”, “volume” : “93” }, “uris” : “http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=77d48a2e-b9da-44ee-accd-a8592a559b4b” } , “mendeley” : { “formattedCitation” : “(Krishna, Cian, ; Aydu0131nou011flu, 2017)”, “manualFormatting” : “(Krishna et al., 2017)”, “plainTextFormattedCitation” : “(Krishna, Cian, ; Aydu0131nou011flu, 2017)”, “previouslyFormattedCitation” : “(Krishna, Cian, ; Aydu0131nou011flu, 2017)” }, “properties” : { “noteIndex” : 22 }, “schema” : “https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json” }(Krishna et al., 2017) On the other hand, transparent packaging is capable of influence consumer’s perceptions of product quality and product trust as they are able to directly see the product.

2.5.4 Perceived Consequences of Purchase mistakeThe perceived consequences of a wrong purchase decision of products can differ across different categories, for example a bad purchase decision for baby foods (Batra and Sinha. 2000) may seems riskier when compared with others categories due to the severity of the consequences. Therefore, consumers use external cues such as visual elements of package, to establish their expectations of the product and thereby reduce the perceived risk associated with product’s characteristics and quality, which leads to an increase in purchase probability ADDIN CSL_CITATION { “citationItems” : { “id” : “ITEM-1”, “itemData” : { “DOI” : “10.1080/09593969.2013.792743”, “author” : { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Vilnai-yavetz”, “given” : “Iris”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” }, { “dropping-particle” : “”, “family” : “Koren”, “given” : “Ran”, “non-dropping-particle” : “”, “parse-names” : false, “suffix” : “” } , “id” : “ITEM-1”, “issue” : “July 2013”, “issued” : { “date-parts” : “0” }, “page” : “37-41”, “title” : “The International Review of Retail , Distribution and Consumer Research Cutting through the clutter : purchase intentions as a function of packaging instrumentality , aesthetics , and symbolism”, “type” : “article-journal” }, “uris” : “http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=cf003647-e177-4ee6-b980-e55b393d8472” } , “mendeley” : { “formattedCitation” : “(Vilnai-yavetz ; Koren, n.d.)”, “manualFormatting” : “(Vilnai-yavetz ; Koren, 2013)”, “plainTextFormattedCitation” : “(Vilnai-yavetz ; Koren, n.d.)”, “previouslyFormattedCitation” : “(Vilnai-yavetz ; Koren, n.d.)” }, “properties” : { “noteIndex” : 23 }, “schema” : “https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json” }(Vilnai-yavetz & Koren, 2013).

Consumer evaluation of packaging elements changes as the perceived purchase risk increases. Thus, visual elements positively influence the decision–making at the point of purchase and play an important role on perceived purchase risk, especially for low involvement products such as food products (Silayoi and Speece, 2004).

Considering risk as the combination of both perceived quality variance and the inconveniences of making purchase mistake, it is hypothesized as perceived purchase risk increases, the purchase intent of packaged goods with either images of the product printed or the presence of transparency elements on package increases as well.

Hypothesis 3a: There is a negative relationship between perceived functional risk and purchase intent.

Hypothesis 3b: There is a negative relationship between perceived financial risk and purchase intent.

Hypothesis 3c: There is a negative relationship between perceived psychological risk and purchase intent.

Based upon the above literature, it was conceptualized that perceived risk (perceived functional risk, perceived financial risk and perceived psychological risk) has a direct negative effects on consumers’ buying behaviour. Furthermore, visual elements of packaging (transparent elements and product imagery on package) negatively impact perceived risk.
On the basis of this rationale, the following Hypotheses are built:
Hypothesis 4a: Perceived functional risk mediates the relationship between Visual Elements of package and Purchase Intent.
Hypothesis 4b: Perceived financial risk mediates the relationship between Visual Elements of package and Purchase Intent.

Hypothesis 4c: Perceived psychological risk mediates the relationship between Visual Elements of package and Purchase Intent.

Figure SEQ Figure * ARABIC 1: Conceptual Framework of proposed hypotheses.Chapter 3. MethodologyThe aim of this chapter is presenting in detail the methodological approach of this study. It concerns the analysis of the primary and secondary data with the intention of reaching conclusions that will help to confirm the hypotheses projected on the previous chapter.

3.1 Review of Conceptual Model and Research ApproachThe conceptual framework of this paper is based upon the effect of visual elements of package on consumers purchase intent of Pizza and Salmon as well as the perceived risk associated with these different categories. The variables associated to visual elements of package are the presence of either transparent elements or an image of the product on package. The variable perceived purchase risk is predicted to have a mediator effect on the relationship between the independent variable (Visual Elements of Package) on the dependent variable, Purchase Intent.
There are three types of methods used for research purposes that provide insights for the structure of the dissertation methodology skeleton: Exploratory, Descriptive and Explanatory (Saunders et al., 2009). On this dissertation, both exploratory and explanatory methods were applied in order to answer the research questions proposed on the previous chapter – Literature Review.
Exploratory research refers to the review of the literature, the clarification of concepts and the construction of hypothesis for the problem or situation to study.
The goal of this kind of research, which is mostly qualitative, instead of provide conclusive evidences, it is provide a better understanding of the problem. On the other hand, explanatory research aims at explain the occurrence of a certain phenomenon in study and establish a cause-and-effect relationship between variables. In other words, this method has the purpose to assess how things interact, which is the final step of this dissertation (Saunders et al.,2009).

In order to elaborate the chapter 2 – the Literature Review – the secondary data was collected though top journals and academic articles. It covered topics such as the relevance of packaging in retail industry, the effects of visual elements of package (the presence of either transparent elements or an image of the product on package) on consumer´s purchase intent. After being able to have an understanding and knowledge about the concepts included on this study it was crucial to associate them and find further relevant insights. Thus, primary data was collected and quantitative investigation was presented.

3.2 Primary Data3.2.1 Online SurveyConcerning the first chapter, one crucial factor in determining consumers’ propensity to purchase products inside packages with either a transparent window or an image of the product is the perceived risk associated with a particular purchase decision.
Therefore, an online survey was developed with the aim to not only understand how packaging influences buying decisions of packaged food products, more specifically packaged pizza and packaged salmon as well but also this survey intents to understand the role of perceived risk on consumers’ purchase intent of these two different food categories, following the conceptual model proposed in Chapter 1. In the questionnaire, participants were randomly assigned to one of six scenarios, three comprising a set of questions on packaged pizza, symbolizing visual appealing and tasteful kind of food and the others scenarios containing the same set of questions regarding packaged salmon, symbolizing the healthy foods to eat on a daily basis. People find junk food visually more attractive, well packaged and better promoted in comparison with healthy food (Pires and Agante, 2011) and this is one of the main reasons why in this study, both healthy and unhealthy food categories will be study.
The online survey consisted of 25 questions which were divided in four topics: questions about the consumers’ purchase regularity within each particular category, questions concerning visual elements of packaging and questions to evaluate the perceived purchase risk within that particular category. Then participants were asked about their purchase intent for purchase packaged foods and demographic questions.
The questionnaire was available online to the general public between 8th May and 11th May 2018 and it was distributed via e-mail and social media. Although the survey was launched in English version that can be found in Appendix I.

Since for this research problem, transparent packaging is being compared with packages with a picture of the product on its final state, it is important to consider opaque packaging (without the presence of product display and graphical representation of the product on packaging) as a “control” scenario in order to understand the importance of the presence of visual displays of the product on package.
For that purpose respondents were requested to answer to the same statements based on the image – accordingly with the scenario – that appeared at the beginning of each survey. These scenarios were random and evenly distributed among respondents, even for the “control” scenarios where there was no product display on package (opaque packaging), for the exact same products. Thus, in this questionnaire, there were six different scenarios each one with a different image that randomly appeared in each survey. That will allow us to quantify the impact of each scenario (the presence of product display versus graphical representation of the product on packaging versus opaque packaging) for each food product category.
Despite the fact that the scenarios were and evenly distributed among respondents, if respondents have never bought before one of the two food categories presented in the online survey, they only answered to the questionnaire regarding the food category that they have already bought at least one time before.
In addition, the respondents were also asked to evaluate the packaging design attractiveness of each scenario accordingly with the product category, when the three different images of each scenario were simultaneously shown in the question. This will let us understand the impact of visual elements of package on consumer’s mind in terms of package attractiveness when presented with different possibilities, which leads to lower levels of perceived risk and higher purchase intentions.

Figure SEQ Figure * ARABIC 2: Questionnaire Design.3.2.2 Construct Measurement
Measurement Model Construct Literature for Scale Items Nº of Items Visual elements of package
(Truong et al.,2016)
(Brakus et al.,2009)
(Simmonds,Woods and Spence,2018) 6 Perceived risk
(Functional, Financial and Psychological) (Bhukya& Singh, 2015)
6 Purchase intent (Vilnai-Yavetz&Koren,2013) 3 Demographic Question (Tsiros and Heilman, 2005) 1 Figure SEQ Figure * ARABIC 3: Proposed constructs, number of scale items and relevant literature sources.Subsequent to a deep review of relevant literature, the most suited measures for this dissertation were selected. In some cases, the constructs were left as their original versions, while in other cases the constructs were either adapted or combined with similar one to better fit the context of this study.
This dissertation’s constructs, number of scale items and the literature sources used to build these scales are displayed in table above (Figure 3).

The constructs presented in the online survey were measured mainly using statements with 7-point “Likert- type” scales, ranging from “Strongly disagree” to “Strongly agree” and one ranking question of three options between “Do not like the product at all” and “Like the product very much”.

3.4 Data AnalysisAll data collected from the Surveys was analyzed using Statistical Package for the Social Science (SPSS), version 25.0, with the purpose to study the impact of visual elements of package on consumers purchase intent and the mediating role of perceived risk (Hayes, 2013).
In order to characterize the sample, descriptive statistics analysis concerning demographics and the overall obtained data of each scenario was performed. Moreover, the Cronbach’s alpha was analyzed, in order to confirm the constructs reliability. In addition, with the purpose to analyze the results, descriptive statistics were used on the statistical analysis, measures of central tendency (median), measures of dispersion or variability (minimum value, maximum value and standard deviation), and statistical tests (ANOVA test and Sobel test) and linear multiple regression were used. For all statistical tests that were carried out, it was considered a significance level of 5%.
A Mediation model (Hayes, 2013) is used in this study in order to evaluate the indirect effect of one variable (X) on another variable (Y) through an intermediary, mediator variable (M). Accordingly, it can be used in this dissertation as the intent of this study’s model is to estimate the indirect impact of visual elements of package on consumers purchase intent, through the intermediary (mediator) variable, which in this case is perceived risk. Therefore, three mediation models were performed in separate, one for each dimension of perceived risk.

Chapter 4. Results and DiscussionThis chapter aims to present and analyze in the detail the data collected in form of the online survey using the methodology already determined in the previous chapters, which will allow us to have relevant conclusions regarding the research questions proposed in the first chapter of this study.

4.1 Sample CharacterizationIn total, 688 respondents answered the online survey. However, 66 respondents claimed to not buy any of the presented categories (packaged pizza and packaged salmon) and therefore the valid survey answers for this research were 622.
As already explained in the Methodology chapter, the survey contained a between subject’s design, therefore participants were randomly assigned to one of the six scenarios – in the case that respondents have bought at least one time package pizza or packaged salmon – each consisting of questions about consumers’ buying behaviour for one of two food product subcategories: packaged pizza and packaged salmon.
Since the scenarios – different packaging designs within different product categories – were random and evenly distributed among respondents, each of them got approximately the same number of participants. The “graph” scenario ( packages displaying a picture of the product) had 203 answers which is 32,64% of the total valid answers, the “see-through” (package with transparent elements) had 221 answers which is correspond to 35,53% of the total valid answers while the “opaque” scenario had 198 answers which means 31,83% of the total valid answers.
Thus, only concerning the packaged pizza scenario, 126 respondents answered the survey regarding transparent packaging, 118 respondents in respect of opaque packaging and 131 respondents in regard to packages displaying a picture of the product.

On the other hand, only concerning the packaged salmon scenario, 95 respondents answered the survey regarding transparent packaging, 80 respondents relating to opaque packaging and 72 respondents regarding packages with an image of the product.
Moreover, 375 respondents (60.3%) answered to the questionnaire regarding the packaged pizza category and 247 respondents (39.7%) regarding the packaged salmon category. This difference can be explained by the fact that despite the fact that the scenarios were randomly and evenly distributed among respondents, if respondents have never bought packaged pizza before, they only answered to the questionnaire regarding the packaged pizza category and vice-versa.
Food Category Package displaying a picture of the product Transparent packaging Opaquepackaging Total
Pizza 34,9% (131) 33,6% (126) 31,5% (118) 60.3% (375)
Salmon 29,1% (72) 38,5% (95) 32,4% (80) 39.7% (247)
Total 32.64% (203) 35.53% (221) 31.83% (198) 100% (622)
Figure SEQ Figure * ARABIC 4: Survey respondents per scenario.Distribution of purchase per category n %
  Only one category Pizza 166 24,13%
Salmon 39 5,67%
  Both Categories 417 60,60%
  Neither of the two categories 66 9,60%
  Total 688 100%
Figure SEQ Figure * ARABIC 5: Survey respondents about the frequency of purchase per food category.Analysing the data presented on figure 5, it can be verified that the majority of the sample elements (60.60%) already bought either packaged pizza and packaged salmon at the supermarket, followed by 24.13% that bought only packaged pizza and 5.67% only bought packaged salmon, which means that 39 respondents never bought packaged pizza but already bought packaged salmon. At least, 9.60% of the sample elements never bought both packaged food pizza and salmon.
By conducting descriptive analysis on SPSS version 23.0 it was verified that 63.3% of the respondents are female and 36.7% are male. Concerning the age of the respondents, with 621 valid answers, it can be verified that the sample elements are between the age of 15 and 82 with the mean of 33 years old and with a standard deviation of approximately 13 years old. Overall, it appears to be a considerably educated sample, as the majority of the sample elements stated to have completed either bachelor degree (22,8%) or a Master’s degree (52,5%).

As concerns the sample’s occupation, about half of the sample elements (48%) are student-workers and 22.8% are students. From the remaining participants, 8.7% have a job working for someone else and 1.6% express to have a job on their own. From the remaining participants, 3.9% are retired and 5.4% stated to be in a professional situation that was not mentioned in the survey.
Variable n %
Gender Male 228 33,10%
Female 394 57,30%
  Education Middle School 14 2%
High School 69 10%
Bachelor Degree 157 22,80%
Master Degree 361 52,50%
Doctoral Degree 21 3,10%
  Occupation Student 157 22,80%
Student-Worker 330 48%
Employee 60 8,70%
Self-Employee Worker 11 1,60%
Retired 27 3,90%
Other 37 5,40%
Figure SEQ Figure * ARABIC 6: Demographic characteristics of the sample.Variable n max min mean Std.deviation
Age 621 82 15 33 13
Figure SEQ Figure * ARABIC 7: Demographic characteristics of the sample (Age).4.2 Measures ReliabilityIn order to verify the constructs’ validity of visual elements of packaging, perceived risk and purchase intent, a reliability study was conducted, before proceeding to the actual analysis of the hypothesis based on the data collected. The study was conducted for each of the six scenarios where the constructs were shown. Furthermore, in the visual elements of package variable, the item 3 was inverted (reverse coded) in order to perform Cronbach’s alpha. After that, the reliability of each measure used in the questionnaire was verified, by analyzing the Chronbach’s alpha coefficient.
The method used consisted on the determination of the Cronbach’s alpha coefficient. This statistical method is suitable for the majority of scales, especially in Likert scales, and the results may be presented in a scale between 0 and 1.
The homogeneity of the answers is verified through the values obtained. Thus, the greater the values obtained, the greater is not only the homogeneity of the answers given to the items that constitute the scale but also the greater the correlation between them, in other words, the better the internal consistency.
Under the light of Nunnally (1978) cited by Maroco, 2007 results equal to or greater than 0.70 are indicators of good internal consistency. However, according to several authors, values that are equal to or greater than 0.60 are still acceptable if the number of items involved are low (DeVellis, 1991 cited by Maroco, 2007).
Cronbach’s alphas for each measure are shown in Figure 7. According to the previous paragraph, the results of the reliability tests demonstrate that all the constructs are valid, as all the coefficient alpha values exceed the value of 0.6. In particular, for the visual elements of packaging dimension, two questions (9 and 17) were not considered in the analysis in order to increase the internal consistency of the group of items.

However, in regard to perceived functional risk dimension, the Cronbach’s alpha of opaque packaging is higher than the “total” Cronbach’s alpha.

  Cronbach’s Alpha
    Dimension Number of items Total “Graphs” “See-Through” “Opaque”
Visual Elements of Packaging 5 0,910 0,908 0,903 0,888
Perceived Financial Risk 2 0,634 0,621 0,653 0,630
Perceived Functional Risk 3 0,757 0,749 0,720 0,791
Purchase Intent 3 0,728 0,655 0,740 0,613
Figure SEQ Figure * ARABIC 8: Survey items’ reliabilities.Therefore, we are able to proceed to the analysis with all the constructs initially included in the questionnaire.

4.3 Results from the Hypothesis TestIn order to test the hypotheses presented in the second chapter, descriptive statistics, a linear multiple regression and classical mediation model were performed.
4.3.1 Descriptive Statistics
By measuring different scenarios against the same constructs we are able to compare the different mean values obtained for purchase intent (with 3 items), visual elements of packaging (with 5 items), perceived financial risk (with 2 items), perceived psychological risk (with 1 item) and perceived functional risk (with 3 items) in order to infer conclusions regarding the proposed research questions. Thus, it is important to start by doing a descriptive analysis in order to calculate the mean of all items and then be able to compare them. The means for each scenario are measured using statements with 7-point “Likert- type” scales, which can be seen in the following figures. Moreover, they represent the average punctuation that the sample elements attributed for each scenario.

Figure SEQ Figure * ARABIC 9: Descriptive statistics for Visual Elements of packaging.Regarding the items that are part of the visual elements of package, it is verified that respondents evidence preference for the food products within transparent packages, followed by food products within packages displaying an image of the product.

Figure SEQ Figure * ARABIC 10: Descriptive statistics for each dimension of Perceived Financial Risk.Concerning the items that are part of the perceived financial risk, the results that are included on figure 10 allow to verify that respondents evidence perceptions of the likelihood that the product is not worth the price that they would paid for it when the product was presented in an opaque package as compared to when presented in transparent packaging instead. Moreover, in the eyes of the respondents, the risk that the product’s quality is not equivalent with its price was higher when the product was presented inside a package with an image of the product as compared to packages that had a transparent element.

Figure SEQ Figure * ARABIC 11: Descriptive statistics for each dimension of Perceived Functional Risk.According to the figure 11, the respondents evidence higher levels of uncertainty that the outcome of a product purchase will not encounter their expectations packages when the product was inside a package with an image of the product elements (as compared to otherwise transparent packaging). However, it was also verified an increase in expected product quality for those products that were presented within opaque packaging when compared with packages with product imagery. Thus, images of food on package do not affect the perception of more favourable evaluations as it was expected. It could be said that such food imagery should not be perceived by consumers as dishonest. This could be a possible explanation for these unexpected results.

Figure SEQ Figure * ARABIC 12: Descriptive statistics for each dimension of Perceived Psychological Risk.For perceived psychological risk items, it was observed that respondents would be disappointed if they had made a wrong purchase decision by buying a poor product on the following item “I will be unhappy if this product does not give the expected results”. The results state that perceived psychological is higher when opaque packaging was shown in the survey; it causes consumers to avoid purchasing products within opaque packages.

Figure SEQ Figure * ARABIC 13: Descriptive statistics for Purchase Intent.Regarding purchase intention variable, the results that are included on figure 13 permit to verify that packages that had a transparent element (as compared to packages displaying an image of the product) were judged to be more trustworthy, received higher consumer preference scores and consequently greater purchase intent.
4.3.2 The effect of visual elements variables over packaged products purchase intentHypothesis 1: Visual elements of package positively impacts purchase intent.

The following linear regression model was performed between the two variables, purchase intent and visual elements of packaging:
PIi= ?1+?2VIi i=1,…,622,
Where: PI – Purchase Intent
VI – Visual elements of packaging
It allowed to know the slope of the model ?2 is positive and to get the regression coefficient of +0.443 with p < 0.001 (figure 14). The model is statistically significant (F(1;620) =304,312 ; p < .001) by doing the ANOVA.

Looking at the variable visual elements of packaging, the coefficient shows that for every unit increase in visual elements of package, the purchase intent for food (packaged) products (pizza and salmon) will increase 0.443 units all other variables remaining constant. By doing Durbin–Watson statistic test, it can be concluded that in this model residuals are not autocorrelated. In addition, in the appendix IV it can be observed normality and homocedasticity.
Consequently, Hypothesis 1 is verified.

Figure SEQ Figure * ARABIC 14: Variable Relationship for Visual Elements of Package (H1).Hypothesis 1a: Including a picture of the product on package will positively affect purchase intent.

Hypothesis 1b: The presence of transparent elements on package positively impacts purchase intent.

In order to understand the effect of the inclusion of a picture of the product or the presence of transparent elements on package or even the impact of opaque packaging on consumer’s purchase intent of food (packaged) products, dummies variables were introduced in the regression model above. In addition, it was also introduced the product category – packaged pizza or packaged salmon – as a dummy variable which is coded as 0 (zero) for pizza and 1 (one) for Salmon. Thus, the impact of each product category can be studied.

Thus, the regression equation can be written as:
PIi= ?1+?2VIi+?3Typei+?4PGi+?5PSi+?6SGi+?7SSi i=1,…,622
Where: PG – Package displaying a picture of pizza
PS – Pizza’s see-through packaging
SG – Packages displaying a picture of salmon
SS – Salmon’s See-through packaging.

In order to explain in detail the model above described as in one model there are these models:
Opaque packaging for pizza:
(Type=0, PG=0, PS=0, SG=0, SS=0) PIi= ?1+?2VIi i=1,…,622Product imagery for Pizza:
(Type=0, PG=1, PS=0, SG=0, SS=0) ) PIi= (?1+?4)+?2VIi i=1,…,622Transparent packaging for Pizza:
(Type=0, PG=0, PS=1, SG=0, SS=0) PIi= (?1+?5)+?2VIi i=1,…,622Opaque packaging for salmon:
(Type=1, PG=0, PS=0, SG=0, SS=0) PIi= (?1+?3)+?2VIi i=1,…,622Product imagery for Salmon:
(Type=1, PG=0, PS=0, SG=1, SS=0) PIi= (?1+?3+?6)+?2VIi i=1,…,622Transparent packaging for Salmon:
(Type=1, PG=0, PS=0, SG=0, SS=1) PIi= (?1+?3+?7)+?2VIi i=1,…,622-53340-66040*** Significant at p<0,1% , ** Significant at p<1% , * Significant at p<5%
-48895348615Figure SEQ Figure * ARABIC 15: Variable Relationship for each product category and each packaging design (H1a and H1b).00Figure SEQ Figure * ARABIC 15: Variable Relationship for each product category and each packaging design (H1a and H1b).

The model is statistically significant as (F(6;615) =53,565 ; p < .001) by doing the ANOVA test. Moreover, it was also verified that 34.3% of purchase intent variation can be explained by the independent variables (visual elements of package within the different product categories). It can be concluded that in this model residuals are neither heterocedastic nor autocorrelated and can be considered having a normal distribution. In this model, there are no signs of multicolinearity since VIF is always under 10.
Based on the obtained results, it can be concluded that the product category, such as salmon or pizza for this study, has a significant impact on consumer’s purchase intent of packaged food products regarding the type of packaging design (visual elements of package). On the other hand, either the presence of transparent elements or an image of the product on package positively impacts consumer’s purchase intent of salmon and pizza. However, this impact is higher for salmon than pizza.
In other words, the use of packages displaying a picture of the product and packages with a transparent window might be seen as an effective marketing tool of capturing the
customer’s attention, enhancing their perception of the product, and consequently increasing purchase intent.

In conclusion, both hypothesis 1a and 1b can be confirmed and it can be said that respondents prefer to see the product, either through, or on, the packaging has a marked effect on their purchase intentions.

Hypothesis 1c: The inclusion of an image of the product on package will stimulate lower purchase intentions than the inclusion of a transparent element on package.
Taking a close look at figure presented above (figure 15), it can be concluded that transparent packaging promotes higher purchase intentions of packaged food products when comparing with packages displaying a picture of the product: the coefficients of transparent packaging (“See-Through”) in both product categories are higher than in food package imagery (“graph”).
In regard to pizza dimension, the effect of the use of transparency (“see-through”) on package is more (0,337-0,308=0,029) 0,029 units than the impact of packaging design with a “Graphic” of the product in consumers purchase intent. On the other hand, in respect of salmon, the effect of using transparency (“see-through”) on package is more (0,635-0,339=0,296) 0,296 units when comparing with the effect of the use of food imagery on package in consumers purchase intent.
Once again, in this model residuals are neither heterocedastic nor autocorrelated and can be considered having a normal distribution. In this model, there are no signs of multicolinearity since VIF is always under 10.
Consequently, Hypothesis 1c can be confirmed.

4.3.3 The effects of visual elements of package variables on perceived functional riskHypothesis 2a: There is a negative relationship between perceived functional risk and transparent packaging.

Hypothesis 2b: There is a negative relationship between perceived functional risk and product imagery.

In order to confirm the veracity of these hypotheses, the following regression analysis was performed between the variables in study.

PRfunci= ?1+?2Graphi+?3See-throughi i=1,…,622,
Where: PRfunc is the Perceived Functional Risk measure.

Graph is product imagery on product packaging.

See-through is transparent packaging.

Dummy variables were defined in order to study the following hypotheses. Thus, packages displaying an image of the product (“graphs”) defined by 1 (one) and 0 (zero) otherwise. The same with “see-through” packaging design which is 1 (one) for transparent packaging and 0 (zero) otherwise.

Figure SEQ Figure * ARABIC 16: Variable relationship for Total Sample (H3a e H3b).The model is statistically significant (F(2;620) =7,237 =304,312 ; p < .001) by doing the ANOVA. It was verified that the type of packaging (transparent packaging or packaging displaying a picture of the product) explains 2.3% of perceived functional risk variation. Furthermore, there is a significant negative impact of transparent packaging (“see-through”) in the variable perceived functional risk (p<0,01). However, there is no impact of packaging displaying a picture of the product in perceived functional risk as (p>0.05). In this model, there is no sign of multicolinearity since VIF is always under 10.

In conclusion, hypothesis 2b is not verified. However, the hypothesis 2a can be confirmed and it can be said that transparent packaging decrease perceived functional risk. Once again, in this model residuals are neither heterocedastic nor autocorrelated and can be considered having a normal distribution.

4.3.4 The effects of the different types of perceived risk on packaged products purchase intent
*** Significant at p<0,1% , ** Significant at p<1% , * Significant at p<5%
Figure SEQ Figure * ARABIC 17: Variable Relationship for total Sample (H4a, H4b and H4c).Hypothesis 3a: There is a negative relationship between perceived functional risk and purchase intent.

The regression equation can be written as:
PIi= ?1+?2PRfunci i=1,…,622,
Where: PRfunc is the Perceived Functional Risk measure
PI is the Purchase Intent measure.

The model is statistically significant (F(1;620) =44,979***; p< .001) by doing the ANOVA. It was verified that only 6.8% of the Purchase Intent variation can be explained by the Perceived Functional Risk. Moreover, there is a significant negative impact of perceived functional risk in purchase intent because (p<0.01).
In this model residuals are neither heterocedastic nor autocorrelated and can be considered having a normal distribution.

The results shown above provide enough statistical evidences to confirm the hypothesis 3a.

Hypothesis 3b: There is a negative relationship between perceived financial risk and purchase intent.

The regression equation can be written as:
PIi= ?1+?2PRfini i=1,…,622,
Where: PRfin is the Perceived Financial Risk measure
PI is the Purchase Intent measure.

The model is statistically significant (F(1;620) =235,85*** ; p < .001) by doing the ANOVA. It was verified that 27.6% of the Purchase Intent variation can be explained by the Perceived Financial Risk. Furthermore, there is a significant negative impact of perceived financial risk in purchase intent as (p<0.01).
In conclusion, hypothesis 3b is verified. In this model residuals are neither heterocedastic nor autocorrelated and can be considered having a normal distribution.

Hypothesis 3c: There is a negative relationship between perceived psychological risk and purchase intent.

The regression equation can be written as:
PIi= ?1+?2PRpsyi i=1,…,622,
Where: PRpsy is the Perceived Psychological Risk measure
PI is the Purchase Intent measure.

By doing the ANOVA, it can be verified that this model is statistically significant (F(1;620) =16,556*** ; p < .001). Thus, it can be said that perceived psychological risk explains 2.6% of purchase intent variation. In addition, there is a significant negative impact of perceived psychological risk in purchase intent as (p<0.01). In this model residuals are neither heterocedastic nor autocorrelated and can be considered having a normal distribution.

The above result provides enough statistical evidence to approve Hypothesis 3c.

4.3.3 The mediating effect of risk on the relationship between visual elements of package and purchase intent
Succeeding the regression analysis and having discovered the effects of each visual element of packaging considered in this study and as well as the effects of each dimension of perceived purchase risk contemplated in this study on the Purchase Intent for a food packaged products, a Mediation analysis was performed to assess whether the positive effects of product imagery and transparent elements on package on consumer’s purchase intent are mediated by perceived purchase risk, in other words, the intention is to analyze if there is a mediation effect of the three dimensions of Perceived Purchase Risk on this relationship.
In sum, this section aims at testing the Hypotheses that investigate the mediating effect of perceived risk on the impact of visual elements of package over packaged food products purchase intent, as proposed in the second chapter:
Hypothesis 4a: Perceived functional risk mediates the relationship between Visual Elements of package and Purchase Intent.
Hypothesis 4b: Perceived financial risk mediates the relationship between Visual Elements of package and Purchase Intent.

Hypothesis 4c: Perceived psychological risk mediates the relationship between Visual Elements of package and Purchase Intent.

The underlying idea of Mediation analysis is that the direct effect of the independent variable (Visual elements of package), on the dependent variable (Purchase Intent) should decrease after the mediator variable (perceived risk) is added to the model.

The mediation analysis compares the effect of the independent variable on the dependent variable without the mediator, named c-path, with the effect of the indirect variable on the direct variable after controlling for the mediator, denominated as c’path.
The purpose is to understand whether the difference between these two effects (c-path – c’ path), identified as the indirect effect, is statistically significant.

In order to confirm the mediation’s effect, c’-path should be smaller than c-path. Furthermore, there are two different types of mediation: firstly, if c’ is non-significant there is full mediation and in the second place, there is only partial mediation if both paths are significant.

However, there is other method of testing the significance of a mediation effect known as Sobel test (Sobel. 1982). In this test, a Z-test is conducted if the difference between c path and c’path is statistically significant and different from zero. It was done for each analysis to confirm the results.

At last, the Percent mediation (PM) was used in order to calculate the effect sizes and it should be interpreted as the percentage of the total effect that is accounted for by the indirect effect.
Hypothesis 4a: Perceived functional risk mediates the relationship between Visual Elements of package and Purchase Intent.

*** Significant at p<0.1%, ** Significant at p<1%, * Significant at p<5%
Figure SEQ Figure * ARABIC 18: The mediating effect of perceived functional risk in the relationship between visual elements of package and purchase intent.The a-path and b-path are, respectively, the estimation of the visual elements of package effects on the perceived functional risk and the estimation of the functional perceived purchase risk on purchase intent.
The results presented on the figure above reveals that there is no meditation effect of perceived functional risk in the relationship between visuals elements of package and purchase intent, because c'(0.4484) is higher than c (0.4433) but both are statistically significant (p<0.005).
To conclude, a significant indirect effect of visual elements of package on purchase intent via perceived functional risk is not observed (IE= -0.0051, 95% CI = -0.0363; 0.0294). This result is also not supported by the Sobel test (Z=-0.3735, p=0.7088).

Thus, based on the information described above, the hypothesis 4a is not verified.
Hypothesis 4b: Perceived financial risk moderates the relationship between Visual Elements of package and Purchase Intent.

*** Significant at p<0.1%, ** Significant at p<1%, * Significant at p<5%
Figure SEQ Figure * ARABIC 19: The mediating effect of perceived financial risk in the relationship between visual elements of package and purchase intent.Regarding the perceived financial risk variable as a mediator in the relationship between visuals elements of package and purchase intent, the mediation analysis’ results indicate perceived financial risk has mediating effect in the relationship visual elements of package and purchase intention variables, because c’ (0.3370) is less than c (0.4433) but both are statistically significant (p<.001), it means that total effect is less that direct effect but both are significant. The difference between both coefficients is also statistically significant whether considered the Sobel test (Z=7.5178, p<0,001) or the indirect effect value (IE= 0.1063, 95% CI = 0.0777; 0.1375). Lastly, the mediating effect of perceived financial variable represents 23.98% (PM=0.2398) of the total effect of visual elements of package on purchase intention variable.

As a result, Hypothesis 4b is validated.

Hypothesis 4c: Perceived psychological risk moderates the relationship between Visual Elements of package and Purchase Intent.

*** Significant at p<0.1%, ** Significant at p<1%, * Significant at p<5%
Figure SEQ Figure * ARABIC 20: The mediating effect of perceived psychological risk in the relationship between visual elements of package and purchase intent.Lastly, in respect to perceived psychological risk, results reveal there is a meditation effect of perceived psychological risk in the relationship between visuals elements of package and purchase intent, because c'(0.4351) is less than c (0.4433) but both are statistically significant (p<.001). The difference between both coefficients is also statistically significant whether considered the indirect effect value (IE= 0.0082, 95% CI = 0.0012; 0.0220).
However, it is not supported by the Sobel test (Z=1.9324, p=0.0533>0.05). Furthermore, the mediator could only account for 1.85% of the total effect, PM=0.0185.

These results do not confirm Hypothesis 4c.

Chapter 5. Conclusions and LimitationsThere were two main objectives for this research. Firstly, the aim of this study is to understand the impact of aesthetics package design elements on consumer purchase decisions of packaged products with particular emphasis on these variables: transparent packaging and (opaque) packaging displaying a picture of the product. In order to investigate these effects, this study focused on food products and analyzed two particular product categories, which packaging is strongly linked with the product in the eyes of the consumer at the point of purchase, namely pizza and salmon.

The second purpose of this research was to study whether perceived purchase risk could explain the nature of the relationships between visual elements of package and purchase intent on the studied product categories. These effects were measured using SPSS version 25.0 statistical software.

Firstly, respondents in the online survey provided product evaluations of food packaging designs shown visually, as well as rated their willingness to purchase the product and perceived risk, across three different packaging designs and contextualized in accordance with each product category. Then, multiple linear regressions where performed in order to understand the effect of visual elements of package on consumer’s purchase intent. As already explain in the third chapter, the methodology, survey’s participants were random and evenly distributed among respondents where they were asked questions about their packaging design preferences regarding the visual elements of package towards buying pizza or salmon.

5.1 Main Findings and Conclusions5.1.1 The effect of visual elements of package on consumer’s purchase intentTo begin with the analysis of the entire sample, and confirming the effects studied in the literature regarding visual elements of package, the results of the study state that enable the consumer to see the product, either through, or on the packaging has a significant effect on consumer’s intention to buy the product. The type of visual element of packaging was found to influence respondent’s buying behaviour, with higher purchase intentions in response to the presence of transparency than to product imagery on packaging.
7620989965Despite the fact that transparent packaging appears advantageous across the different product categories in study, the effect on consumer’s purchase intention seems to differ across each category as this impact is higher for salmon (0,635***) than pizza (0,337***).

-99695-85090Figure SEQ Figure * ARABIC 21: Status of Hypotheses H1.00Figure SEQ Figure * ARABIC 21: Status of Hypotheses H1.

On the table below (Figure 22) are displayed the conclusions from the hypothesis proposed in the chapter 2, related to the effect of visual elements of package in study on perceived functional risk.
In support of the third research hypothesis of this study, transparent packaging evokes high perceived functionality and symbolic associations of product quality. However, as noted above, Hypothesis 3b was not supported. Thus, it is possible to conclude that in this study, respondents did not use the package pictures as an evaluative cue that would change beliefs and functional evaluations.
869951075055Figure SEQ Figure * ARABIC 22: Status of Hypothesis H2.00Figure SEQ Figure * ARABIC 22: Status of Hypothesis H2.

These results might be due to the use of overly-enhanced or manipulated images of the product as it can lead to less favourable product evaluation– if consumers are led to perceived the imagery as dishonest or misleading it can result in negative product’s beliefs, contrary to what was expected form the literature review.

Figure SEQ Figure * ARABIC 23: Status of Hypotheses H3.Comparing the results for both dimensions of perceived risk, the results demonstrated that all the dimensions of perceived risk – perceived functional risk, perceived financial risk and perceived psychological risk have direct negative and significant effect on consumers’ purchase intention toward packaged products. In addition, perceived financial risk has greater negative effect and contributes for 60 percent of variance in consumers’ intention to purchase packaged products. Likewise, perceived functional risk also has high significant effect. These results can be explained by the reason of the association of price-quality concern.
5.1.2 The mediating role of perceived risk
57151422400Figure SEQ Figure * ARABIC 24: Status of Hypotheses H4.00Figure SEQ Figure * ARABIC 24: Status of Hypotheses H4.

Results obtained from the mediation analysis stated that, perceived financial risk explains the relationships between visual elements of package and consumers’ intention to purchase packaged products. Strictly speaking, the presence of transparency and product imagery on packaging causes lower perceived financial risk, which then leads to higher purchase intent. Therefore, perceived financial risk explains the relation between visual elements of package and food packaged products purchase intent because it conveys the effect of the first on the latter. Contrary, for perceived functional risk, the results do not support a mediating effect of perceived functional risk on the relationship between visual elements of package and purchase intent. Lastly, the results revealed that there was not mediator effect for perceived psychological risk between the independent variable on the dependent variable.
Therefore, the results described above can also be interpreted in the following way: As packaged food has been viewed as a low involvement product, purchase decision is less on careful examination of its functional attributes and more on the visual elements of packaging. For packaged foods such as pizza and salmon that usually are not in its final form when inside the package, there are uncertainly and perceived risk involved , which can have negative effects on purchase intentions. Thus, consumers use external cues such as transparency or imagery to establish their expectations of the product and consequently reduce the perceived risk. As transparent packaging allows consumers to see and evaluate directly the product through the package – contrarily to product imagery which can be perceived as dishonest or misleading – it leads to higher purchase intentions and higher perceived functionality than packages displaying an image of the product.
5.2 Academic/ Managerial ImplicationsThis study contributes to the existing literature, helping to fill the gap in research about transparency versus product imagery, when no others visual elements were take into consideration, on packaging across different categories. Several authors have studied the importance of packaging design, including several elements, both verbal and visual, but this study adds the role of risk (psychological, financial and functional) as a mediator of the relationship between the elements of packaging and food packaged products purchase intent. Thus, the results of this study contribute to understand consumer’s behaviour with regard to visual interpretations as well as the important role of the different dimensions of risk in influencing directly and indirectly consumers’ willingness to purchase packaged products.
In terms of managerial implications, the results and conclusions of this study should be a wake-up call to manufactures and they are particularly important for new and innovative products, which are still unknown to consumers, as this study demonstrates that transparency should at least be considered wherever feasible and that product imagery should always be perceived as credible in the eyes of consumers in order to boost FMCG company’s sales. Thus, it shows that marketing managers must achieve a balance between the need for packages to attract and persuade and simultaneously with the need to communicate in a truthful, understandable and legitimate form. Regarding products such as food goods, where the product is usually not in its final form, the consumer creates an impression of the product in its prepared state based on the visual elements of package. Therefore, managers should be aware of the communicative power of packages and understand that the impact of package design is inherently subjective.

5.3 Limitations and Further ResearchSeveral limitations of this study must be taken into account for future research. In the first place, although the questionnaire collected a satisfactory number of valid responses (822 responses), participants were randomly assigned to one of three scenarios, regarding two product categories: transparent packaging, opaque packaging and packaging displaying an image of the product, which resulted in 221 answers for the first scenario, 198 answers for the second one and 203 for the third scenario. For further research it would be very important to have a larger sample size order to be more representative of each sample population.
Secondly, respondents did not interact with the physical packaging, or view any important information not presented on the front façade because the research consisted of online experimentation and despite the fact that this study had a designer collaboration, some image shown in the survey could have been misunderstood.
Thirdly, visual elements of package in this study were measure based on judgments that were not directly link to product imagery and transparency, instead were predicted to involve visual perceptions as a whole. Thus, further research should word a survey items more specifically so as to better capture the link between product imagery and transparency and the other variables in study.
Fourth, this study tested only two types of packaged food products – salmon and pizza; however there are other categories that, if analyzed, could have lead to different results.
Lastly, in respect to future research in this field, it would be important to do a similar analysis across different product categories, especially with different levels of perceived risk.

Chapter 6. ReferencesADDIN Mendeley Bibliography CSL_BIBLIOGRAPHY Agariya, A. K., Johari, A., Sharma, H. K., Chandraul, U. N. S., & Singh, D. (2012). The Role of Packaging in Brand Communication, 3(2), 1–13.

Ampuero, O., & Vila, N. (2006). Consumer perceptions of product packaging. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 23(2), 100–112.
Batra, R. (2000). Consumer-Level Factors Moderating The Success Of Private Label Brands, 76(2), 175–191.
Deng, X., & Srinivasan, R. (2013). Increase or Decrease, 77(September), 4.
Gofman, A., Moskowitz, H. R., Fyrbjork, J., Moskowitz, D., Mets, T., Ave, W., … York, N. (2009). Extending Rule Developing Experimentation to Perception of Food Packages with Eye Tracking, 66–78.

Homer, P. M., & Gauntt, S. G. (1992). The Role of Imagery in the Processing of Visual and Verbal Package Information. Journal of Mental Imagery, 16, 123–144.

Keizer, J. (2016). Faculty of Behavioral Management and Social Sciences The visual influence of transparent product packages.

Kim, M., & Lennon, S. J. (2000). Television shopping for apparel in the United States: Effects of perceived amount of information on perceived risks and purchase intentions. Family and Consumer Sciences Research Journal, 28(3), 301–331.

Krishna, A., Cian, L., & Ayd?no?lu, N. Z. (2017). Sensory Aspects of Package Design. Journal of Retailing, 93(1), 43–54.
MacInnis, D. J., & Price, L. L. (1987). The Role of Imagery in Information Processing: Review and Extensions. Journal of Consumer Research, 13(4), 473.
Malkewitz, K. (2006). Packaging Design As Resource for the Construction of Brand Identity. 3rd International Wine Business Research Conference, (July), 6–7.
Pappas, N. (2016). Marketing strategies, perceived risks, and consumer trust in online buying behaviour. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 29, 92–103.
Park, J., Lennon, S. J., & Stoel, L. (2005). On-line product presentation: Effects on mood, perceived risk, and purchase intention. Psychology and Marketing, 22(9), 695–719.
Patrick, V. M., & Peracchio, L. A. (2010). “Curating” the JCP special issue on aesthetics in consumer psychology: An introduction to the aesthetics issue. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 20(4), 393–397.
Rettie, R., & Brewer, C. (2000). The verbal and visual components of package design. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 9(1), 56–70.
Rundh, B. (2005). The multi?faceted dimension of packaging. British Food Journal, 107(9), 670–684.
Schoormans, J. P. L., & Robben, H. S. J. (1997). The effect of new package design on product attention, categorization and evaluation. Journal of Economic Psychology, 18(2–3), 271–287.
Sheau-Fen, Y., Sun-May, L., & Yu-Ghee, W. (2012). Store brand proneness: Effects of perceived risks, quality and familiarity. Australasian Marketing Journal, 20(1), 48–58.
Silayoi, P., & Speece, M. (2004). Packaging and purchase decisions Introduction?: packaging at the point of sale The packaged food products market in Thailand. British Food Journal, 106(8), 607–628.

Silayoi, P., & Speece, M. (2007). The importance of packaging attributes: a conjoint analysis approach. European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 41,1495-1517.

Simmonds, G., & Spence, C. (2017). Thinking inside the box: How seeing products on, or through, the packaging influences consumer perceptions and purchase behaviour. Food Quality and Preference, 62, 340–351.
Simmonds, G., Woods, A. T., & Spence, C. (2018). ” Show me the goods “?: Assessing the e ff ectiveness of transparent packaging vs . product imagery on product evaluation. Food Quality and Preference, 63(January 2017), 18–27.
Sogn?Grundvåg, G., & Østli, J. (2009). Consumer evaluation of unbranded and unlabelled food products. European Journal of Marketing, 43(1/2), 213–228. Tsiros, M., & Heilman, C. M. (2005). The Effect of Expiration Dates and Perceived Risk on Purchasing Behavior in Grocery Store Perishable Categories. Journal of Marketing, 69(2), 114–129.
Underwood, R. L. (2003). The Communicative Power of Product Packaging: Creating Brand Identity via Lived and Mediated Experience. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 11(1), 62–76.
Underwood, R. L., & Klein, N. M. (2002). Packaging as Brand Communication: Effects of Product Pictures on Consumer Responses to the Package and Brand. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 10(4), 58–68.
Underwood, R. L., Klein, N. M., & Burke, R. R. (2001). Packaging communication: attentional effects of product imagery. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 10(7), 403–422.
Underwood, R. L., & Ozanne, J. L. (1998). Is your package an effective communicator? A normative framework for increasing the communicative competence of packaging. Journal of Marketing Communications, 4(4), 207–220.
Vieira, K. C., Alcantara, V. D. C., Prado, J. W. do, Pinto, C. L., & Rezende, D. C. de. (2015). How Does Packaging Influence Consumer Behavior? A Multidisciplinary Bibliometric Study. International Business Research, 8(5), 66–80.
Vilnai-Yavetz, I., & Koren, R. (2013). Cutting through the clutter: Purchase intentions as a function of packaging instrumentality, aesthetics, and symbolism.International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research, 23(4), 394–417.
Urbany, J. E., Dickson, P A. & Kalapurakal, R. (1996).Price search in the retail grocery marktt. Journal of Marketing, 60(2),91-10.

Rundh, Bo (2005). The Multi-Faceted Dimension of Packaging: Marketing Logistic or Marketing Tool. British Food Journal,107(9), 670–84.

Wood, C.M.,& Sheer, L.K.(1996). Incorporating Perceived Risk into Models of Consumer Deal Assessment and Purchase Intent. Advances in Consumer Research, 23, 399-404.

Kotler, P.&Keller, K. (2012). Marketing management (14th ed.). Upper Saddle: Pearson Prentice-Hall.

Connolly, A, & Davison, L. (1996). How does design affect decisions at point of sale? Journal of Brand Management, 4(2), 100-107.

Roselius, T.(1971).Consumer rankings of risk reduction methods. Journal of Marketing, 35, 56-61.

Urbany, J. E.,Dickson, P A. & Kalapurakal, R. (1996).Price search in the retail grocery marktt. Journal of Marketing, 60(2), 91-10.

Wells, L. E., Farley, H., & Armstrong, G. A. (2007).The importance of packaging design for own-label food brands. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 35 (9), 677-690.

Darron Billeter, Meng Zhu, & J. Jeffrey Inman (2012).Transparent Packaging and Consumer Purchase Decisions.Association for Consumer Research, 308-312.

Kupiec, Beata & Brian Revell (2001).Measuring Consumer Quality Judgements.

British Food Journal, 103(1), 7–22.

Bettman, J. R. (1973). Perceived Risk and its Components: A Model and Empirical Test. Journal of Marketing Research, 10(2), 184–190.

Bhukya R. & Singh S. (2015).The effect of perceived risk dimensions on purchase intention: An empirical evidence from Indian private labels market. American Journal of Business, Vol. 30, 218-230
Semeijn, Janjaap, Allard C. R. Van Riel, & A. Beatriz Ambrosini (2004).Consumer Evaluations of Store Brands: Effects of Store Image and Product Attributes. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 11(1), 247–58.

Morrison, D. (1979).Purchase Intentions and Purchase Behavior.The Journal of Marketing, 43(2), 65–74.

Erdem, T., Zhao, Y., & Valenzuela, A. (2004). Performance of store brands: A cross- country analysis of consumer store-brand preferences, perceptions and risk. Journal of Marketing Research, 41(1), 86–100.

Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2009). Research methods for business students (5th ed.). Prentice Hall: Pearson Education UK.

Pires, C & Agante, L. (2011).Encouraging children to eat more healthily: The influence of packaging. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 10(3): 161–168.

Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis.
Maroco, J. (2007). Análise Estatística – Com Utilização do SPSS. Lisbon: Edições Sílabo, LDA.

Kotler, Ph. (2003) Marketing management (9th ed). Upper Saddle River: Prentice-Hall.

ADDIN Mendeley Bibliography CSL_BIBLIOGRAPHY Brakus, J. J., Schmitt, B. H., & Zarantonello, L. (2009). Brand Experience: What Is It? How Is It Measured? Does It Affect Loyalty? Journal of Marketing, 73(3), 52–68.
Truong, Y., Klink, R. R., Simmons, G., Grinstein, A., & Palmer, M. (2017). Branding strategies for high-technology products: The effects of consumer and product innovativeness. Journal of Business Research, 70, 85–91.
Tsiros, M., & Heilman, C. M. (2005). The Effect of Expiration Dates and Perceived Risk on Purchasing Behavior in Grocery Store Perishable Categories. Journal of Marketing, 69(2), 114–129.
Vilnai-yavetz, I., & Koren, R. (2013). The International Review of Retail , Distribution and Consumer Research Cutting through the clutter?: purchase intentions as a function of packaging instrumentality , aesthetics , and symbolism, 37–41.

Chapter 7. Appendices7.1 Appendix I: Online Survey Guideline
Introduction
My name is Maria Inês Santos and the following questionnaire is a key part of my Master Thesis at Católica-Lisbon School of Business and Economics.  
This questionnaire will take approximately 5 minutes to be completed and it is important that you answer honestly. All the information will be treated confidentially.  
Thank you in advance for your time and cooperation!
Block 1 – Target Selection
Q2. Have you ever bought packaged pizza at the supermarket?
Yes
No
Q3. Have you ever bought packaged salmon at the supermarket?
Yes
No
Block 2 – Purchase Frequency
Q75. How often do you purchase packaged salmon, on average, per month?
never
one time
two times
three times
four or more times
Q40. How often do you purchase packaged pizza, on average, per month?
never
one time
two times
three times
four or more times
Block 3 – Packaged Pizza
1287780643890Q4. Imagine that you are in the supermarket looking for a packaged pizza to buy. According to the picture below, please indicate to which extent you disagree or agree with the following sentences.                                                                                                  
Q5. Imagine that you are in the supermarket looking for a packaged pizza to buy.
1373505473710According to the picture below, please indicate to which extent you disagree or agree with the following sentences.                                         
Q6. Imagine that you are in the supermarket looking for a packaged pizza to buy.
1288415508635According to the picture below, please indicate to which extent you disagree or agree with the following sentences.                                   
Q7. Please indicate to which extent you disagree or agree with the following sentences.

This product makes a strong impression on my visual sense or other senses.

I find this product interesting in a sensory way.

This product does not appeal to my senses.

Overall, I like this product.

Q8. The packaging is attractive.

Q9. How much do you like the product shown overall? Please drag one image in each one of the boxes, arranging the images according to the labels above each box.

108204027305
Q10. Please indicate to which extent you disagree or agree with the following sentences.

I think this product won’t provide the promised benefits.

If I buy this product, I like to be sure that I get the best value for the money I spend.

I think buying this product does not imply a waste of my money.
I think this product does not have the best ingredients.
I think this product is low quality.
I will be unhappy if this product does not give the expected results
Q11. Please indicate to which extent you disagree or agree with the following sentences.

I would be glad to try the food in this package.

I believe that most people would like to buy this product.

I would purchase this product.

Block 4 – Packaged Salmon
Q12. Imagine that you are in the supermarket looking for a packaged salmon to buy.
1384935829945According to the picture below, please indicate to which extent you disagree or agree with the following sentences.                                                                                
12820651003300Q13. Imagine that you are in the supermarket looking for a packaged salmon to buy. According to the picture below, please indicate to which extent you disagree or agree with the following sentences.                                                     
Q14. Imagine that you are in the supermarket looking for a packaged salmon to buy.  
According to the picture below, please indicate to which extent you disagree or agree with the following sentences.

                                            
11296656794500
Q15. Please indicate to which extent you disagree or agree with the following sentences.

This product makes a strong impression on my visual sense or other senses.

I find this product interesting in a sensory way.

This product does not appeal to my senses.

Overall, I like this product.

Q16. The packaging is attractive.

87249098171000Q17. How much do you like the product shown overall? Please drag one image in each one of the boxes, arranging the images according to the labels above each box.

Q32. Please indicate to which extent you disagree or agree with the following sentences.

I think this product won’t provide the promised benefits.

If I buy this product, I like to be sure that I get the best value for the money I spend.

I think buying this product does not imply a waste of my money.

I think this product does not have the best ingredients.

I think this product is low quality.

I will be unhappy if this product does not give the expected results
Q33. Please indicate to which extent you disagree or agree with the following sentences.

I would be glad to try the food in this package.

I believe that most people would like to buy this product.

I would purchase this product.

Block 5 – Demographic Variables
Q43. Gender
Male
Female
Q44. Age
Q45. Level of Education
Middle School
High School
Bachelor Degree
Master Degree
Doctoral Degree
Q46. Occupation
Student
Student Worker
Employee
Self-Employed worker
Retired
Other
Gender
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid Male 228 33,1 36,7 36,7
Female 394 57,3 63,3 100,0
Total 622 90,4 100,0 Missing System 66 9,6 Total 688 100,0 7.2 Appendix II: SPSS Output – Demographic
Level of Education
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid Middle School 14 2,0 2,3 2,3
High School 69 10,0 11,1 13,3
Bachelor Degree 157 22,8 25,2 38,6
Master Degree 361 52,5 58,0 96,6
Doctoral Degree 21 3,1 3,4 100,0
Total 622 90,4 100,0 Missing System 66 9,6 Total 688 100,0 Occupation
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid Student 157 22,8 25,2 25,2
Student Worker 330 48,0 53,1 78,3
Employee 60 8,7 9,6 87,9
Self-Employed Worker 11 1,6 1,8 89,7
Retired 27 3,9 4,3 94,1
Other 37 5,4 5,9 100,0
Total 622 90,4 100,0 Missing System 66 9,6 Total 688 100,0 Descriptive Statistics – Age
N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation Skewness Kurtosis
Statistic Statistic Statistic Statistic Statistic Statistic Std. Error Statistic Std. Error
Age 621 15 82 32,79 12,818 1,061 ,098 -,066 ,196
Valid N (listwise) 621 Graph (Package with an image of the product)
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid otherwise 419 60,9 67,4 67,4
Graph 203 29,5 32,6 100,0
Total 622 90,4 100,0 Missing System 66 9,6 Total 688 100,0 See-Through (Transparent Packaging)
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid otherwise 401 58,3 64,5 64,5
see-through 221 32,1 35,5 100,0
Total 622 90,4 100,0 Missing System 66 9,6 Total 688 100,0 Opaque
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid otherwise 424 61,6 68,2 68,2
opaque 198 28,8 31,8 100,0
Total 622 90,4 100,0 Missing System 66 9,6 Total 688 100,0 Product Category (Type)
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid pizza 375 54,5 60,3 60,3
salmon 247 35,9 39,7 100,0
Total 622 90,4 100,0 Missing System 66 9,6 Total 688 100,0 7.3 Appendix 3 – SPSS Output – Measure variables”Total” Packages
Case Processing Summary – Total of packages
N %
Cases Valid 688 100,0
Excludeda0 ,0
Total 688 100,0
a. Listwise deletion based on all variables in the procedure.

Reliability Statistics for Visual Elements of Pack.

Cronbach’s Alpha N of Items
,910 5
Reliability Statistics – Perceived financial risk
Cronbach’s Alpha N of Items
,634 2
Reliability Statistics – Perceived financial risk
Cronbach’s Alpha N of Items
,634 2
Reliability Statistics – functional
Cronbach’s Alpha N of Items
,757 3
Reliability Statistics for Purchase Intents
Cronbach’s Alpha N of Items
,728 3
Packaging with an image of the product (Graph)
Case Processing Summary – Graphs
N %
Cases Valid 203 100,0
Excludeda0 ,0
Total 203 100,0
a. Listwise deletion based on all variables in the procedure.

Reliability Statistics for Visual Elements

Cronbach’s Alpha N of Items
,908 5
Reliability Statistics – PR Financial (Graph)
Cronbach’s Alpha N of Items
,621 2
Reliability Statistics – PR Functional (Graphs)
Cronbach’s Alpha N of Items
,749 3
Reliability Statistics for Purchase Intents
Cronbach’s Alpha N of Items
,655 3
Transparent Packaging (See-Through)
Case Processing Summary – See-Through
N %
Cases Valid 221 100,0
Excludeda0 ,0
Total 221 100,0
a. Listwise deletion based on all variables in the procedure.

Reliability Statistics for Visual Elements
Cronbach’s Alpha N of Items
,903 5
Reliability Statistics – PR Functional (See-through)
Cronbach’s Alpha N of Items
,720 3
Reliability Statistics – PR Financial (See-through)
Cronbach’s Alpha N of Items
,653 2
Reliability Statistics for Purchase Intents
Cronbach’s Alpha N of Items
,740 3
Opaque packaging
Case Processing Summary for Opaque
N %
Cases Valid 198 100,0
Excludeda0 ,0
Total 198 100,0
a. Listwise deletion based on all variables in the procedure.

Reliability Statistics for Visual Elements
Cronbach’s Alpha N of Items
,888 5
Reliability Statistics – PR Functional (Opaque)
Cronbach’s Alpha N of Items
,791 3
Reliability Statistics – PR Finantial (Opaque)
Cronbach’s Alpha N of Items
,630 2

Reliability Statistics for Purchase Intents
Cronbach’s Alpha N of Items
,613 3
7.3 Appendix 4 – SPSS Output – Inferential Statistics HypothesisHypothesis 1: Visual elements of package positively impacts purchase intent.

Model SummarybModel R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate Durbin-Watson
1 ,574a ,329 ,328 ,93946 2,005
a. Predictors: (Constant), Mean of Visual Elements
b. Dependent Variable: Mean of Purchase Intents
ANOVAaModel Sum of Squares dfMean Square F Sig.

1 Regression 268,581 1 268,581 304,312 ,000b
Residual 547,203 620 0,883 Total 815,784 621 a. Dependent Variable: Mean of Purchase Intents
b. Predictors: (Constant), Mean of Visual Elements
CoefficientsaModel Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized Coefficients t Sig.

B Std. Error Beta 1 (Constant) 2,595 0,116 22,301 ,000
Mean of Visual Elements 0,443 0,025 0,574 17,445 ,000
a. Dependent Variable: Mean of Purchase Intents
260604018605500left61700
Hypothesis 1a: Including a picture of the product on package will positively affect purchase intent.

Hypothesis 1b: The presence of transparent elements on package positively impacts purchase intent.

Hypothesis 1c: The inclusion of an image of the product on package will stimulate lower purchase intentions than the inclusion of a transparent element on package.

Model SummarybModel R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate Durbin-Watson
17780346710a. Predictors: (Constant), Salmon’s See-through, Salmon’s Graph, Mean of Visual Elements, Pizza’s Graph, Pizza’s See-through, Type
b. Dependent Variable: Mean of Purchase Intents
020000a. Predictors: (Constant), Salmon’s See-through, Salmon’s Graph, Mean of Visual Elements, Pizza’s Graph, Pizza’s See-through, Type
b. Dependent Variable: Mean of Purchase Intents
1 ,586a ,343 ,337 ,93338 1,913
Model Sum of Squares dfMean Square F Sig.

1 Regression 279,995 6 46,666 53,565 ,000b
Residual 535,789 615 ,871 Total 815,784 621 a. Dependent Variable: Mean of Purchase Intents
b. Predictors: (Constant), Salmon’s See-through, Salmon’s Graph, Mean of Visual Elements, Pizza’s Graph, Pizza’s See-through, Type
CoefficientsaModel Coefficients t Sig. Collinearity Statistics
B Std. Error Beta Tolerance VIF
(Constant)
Mean of Visual Elements
Type
Pizza’s Graph
Pizza’s See-through
Salmon’s Graph
Salmon’s See-through 1,620 ,167 9,702 ,000 ,614** ,038 ,554 16,095 ,000 ,873 1,146
,798*** ,135 ,341 5,903 ,000 ,320 3,126
,308** ,120 ,110 2,568 ,010 ,580 1,724
,337*** ,122 ,118 2,765 ,006 ,577 1,734
,339** ,152 ,095 2,223 ,027 ,587 1,703
,635*** ,146 ,199 4,362 ,000 ,501 1,998
a. Dependent Variable: Mean of Purchase Intents
2291715000-461010-69850
Hypothesis 2a: There is a negative relationship between perceived functional risk and transparent packaging.

Hypothesis 2b: There is a negative relationship between perceived functional risk and product imagery.

Model SummarybModel R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate Durbin-Watson
1 ,151a ,023 ,020 1,17833 1,947
a. Predictors: (Constant), See-Through, Graph
b. Dependent Variable: Perceived functional Risk
CoefficientsaModel Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized Coefficients t Sig. Collinearity Statistics
B Std. Error Beta Tolerance VIF
1 (Constant) 3,965 ,084 47,345 ,000 Graph ,081 ,118 ,032 ,691 ,490 ,733 1,364
See-Through -,328 ,115 -,132 -2,846 ,005 ,733 1,364
a. Dependent Variable: Perceived functional risk (-)
-3568707175500239649014795500
Hypothesis 3a: There is a negative relationship between perceived functional risk and purchase intent.

Model SummarybModel R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate Durbin-Watson
1 ,260a ,068 ,066 1,10760 2,122
a. Predictors: (Constant), Perceived Functional risk
b. Dependent Variable: Mean of Purchase Intents
ANOVAaModel Sum of Squares dfMean Square F Sig.

1 Regression 55,179 1 55,179 44,979 ,000b
Residual 760,605 620 1,227 Total 815,784 621 a. Dependent Variable: Mean of Purchase Intents
b. Predictors: (Constant), Perceived Functional risk
CoefficientsaModel Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized Coefficients t Sig.

B Std. Error Beta 1 (Constant) 5,487 ,151 36,247 ,000
Perceived risk functional -,250 ,037 -,260 -6,707 ,000
a. Dependent Variable: Mean of Purchase Intents
right29845000
81915000
Hypothesis 3b: There is a negative relationship between perceived financial risk and purchase intent.

Model SummarybModel R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate Durbin-Watson
1 ,525a ,276 ,274 ,97631 2,100
a. Predictors: (Constant), Perceived Financial Risk
b. Dependent Variable: Mean of Purchase Intents
ANOVAaModel Sum of Squares dfMean Square F Sig.

1 Regression 224,808 1 224,808 235,850 ,000b
Residual 590,975 620 ,953 Total 815,784 621 a. Dependent Variable: Mean of Purchase Intents
b. Predictors: (Constant), Perceived Financial Risk
CoefficientsaModel Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized Coefficients t Sig.

B Std. Error Beta 1 (Constant) 6,258 ,120 52,154 ,000
Perceived Risk financial -,602 ,039 -,525 -15,357 ,000
a. Dependent Variable: Mean of Purchase Intents
225361510985500-337185508000
Hypothesis 3c: There is a negative relationship between perceived psychological risk and purchase intent.

Model SummarybModel R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate Durbin-Watson
1 ,161a ,026 ,024 1,13206 2,112
a. Predictors: (Constant), Perceived Psychological Risk
b. Dependent Variable: Mean of Purchase Intents
ANOVAaModel Sum of Squares dfMean Square F Sig.

1 Regression 21,217 1 21,217 16,556 ,000b
Residual 794,567 620 1,282 Total 815,784 621 a. Dependent Variable: Mean of Purchase Intents
b. Predictors: (Constant), Perceived Psychological Risk
CoefficientsaModel Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized Coefficients t Sig.

B Std. Error Beta 1 (Constant) 4,890 ,103 47,672 ,000
Perceived Risk psychological -,146 ,036 -,161 -4,069 ,000
a. Dependent Variable: Mean of Purchase Intents
-30861000025107908064500
Hypothesis 4a: Perceived functional risk mediates the relationship between Visual Elements of package and Purchase Intent.
Descriptive Statistics
N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation
Perceived Risk functional 622 1,00 7,00 3,8746 1,19010
Valid N (listwise) 622 Run MATRIX procedure:
************* PROCESS Procedure for SPSS Release 2.16.3 ******************
Written by Andrew F. Hayes, Ph.D. www.afhayes.com
**************************************************************************
Model = 4
Y = PI
X = VI
M = PRfuncSample size
622
**************************************************************************
Outcome: PRfuncModel Summary
R R-sq MSE F df1 df2 p
,4722 ,2230 1,1023 177,9227 1,0000 620,0000 ,0000
Model
coeff se t p LLCI ULCI
constant 5,5160 ,1301 42,4123 ,0000 5,2606 5,7714
VI -,3788 ,0284 -13,3388 ,0000 -,4346 -,3231
**************************************************************************
Outcome: PI
Model Summary
R R-sq MSE F df1 df2 p
,5739 ,3294 ,8838 152,0152 2,0000 619,0000 ,0000
Model
coeff se t p LLCI ULCI
constant 2,5209 ,2300 10,9596 ,0000 2,0692 2,9726
PRfunc -,0135 ,0360 -,3747 ,7080 -,0571 ,0841
VI ,4484 ,0288 15,5434 ,0000 ,3918 ,5051
************************** TOTAL EFFECT MODEL ****************************
Outcome: PI
Model Summary
R R-sq MSE F df1 df2 p
,5738 ,3292 ,8826 304,3120 1,0000 620,0000 ,0000
Model coeff se t p LLCI ULCI
constant 2,5953 ,1164 22,3008 ,0000 2,3667 2,8238
VI ,4433 ,0254 17,4445 ,0000 ,3934 ,4932
***************** TOTAL, DIRECT, AND INDIRECT EFFECTS ********************
Total effect of X on Y
Effect SE t p LLCI ULCI
,4433 ,0254 17,4445 ,0000 ,3934 ,4932
Direct effect of X on Y
Effect SE t p LLCI ULCI
,4484 ,0288 15,5434 ,0000 ,3918 ,5051
Indirect effect of X on Y
Effect Boot SE BootLLCI BootULCIPRfunc -,0051 ,0168 -,0363 ,0294
Partially standardized indirect effect of X on Y
Effect Boot SE BootLLCI BootULCIPRfunc -,0045 ,0147 -,0321 ,0255
Completely standardized indirect effect of X on Y
Effect Boot SE BootLLCI BootULCIPRfunc -,0066 ,0217 -,0474 ,0375
Ratio of indirect to total effect of X on Y
Effect Boot SE BootLLCI BootULCIPRfunc -,0115 ,0381 -,0827 ,0658
Ratio of indirect to direct effect of X on Y
Effect Boot SE BootLLCI BootULCIPRfunc -,0114 ,0374 -,0764 ,0705
R-squared mediation effect size (R-sq_med)
Effect Boot SE BootLLCI BootULCIPRfunc ,0675 ,0249 ,0217 ,1195
Normal theory tests for indirect effect
Effect se Z p
-,0051 ,0137 -,3735 ,7088
******************** ANALYSIS NOTES AND WARNINGS *************************
Number of bootstrap samples for bias corrected bootstrap confidence intervals:
5000
Level of confidence for all confidence intervals in output:
95,00
NOTE: Some cases were deleted due to missing data. The number of such cases was:
66
NOTE: Kappa-squared is disabled from output as of version 2.16.

—— END MATRIX —–
Hypothesis 4b: Perceived financial risk mediates the relationship between Visual Elements of package and Purchase Intent.

Descriptive Statistics
N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation
Perceived Risk financial 622 1,00 7,00 2,8915 ,99873
Valid N (listwise) 622 Run MATRIX procedure:
************* PROCESS Procedure for SPSS Release 2.16.3 ******************
Written by Andrew F. Hayes, Ph.D. www.afhayes.com
**************************************************************************
Model = 4
Y = PI
X = VI
M = PPRfinSample size
622
**************************************************************************
Outcome: PPRfinModel Summary
R R-sq MSE F df1 df2 p
,3858 ,1488 ,8504 108,4041 1,0000 620,0000 ,0000
Model coeff se t p LLCI ULCI
constant 4,0168 ,1142 35,1634 ,0000 3,7925 4,2411
VI -,2597 ,0249 -10,4117 ,0000 -,3087 -,2107
**************************************************************************
Outcome: PI
Model Summary
R R-sq MSE F df1 df2 p
,6615 ,4375 ,7413 240,7397 2,0000 619,0000 ,0000
Model coeff se t p LLCI ULCI
constant 4,2395 ,1846 22,9712 ,0000 3,8770 4,6019
PPRfin -,4093 ,0375 -10,9164 ,0000 -,4830 -,3357
VI ,3370 ,0252 13,3498 ,0000 ,2874 ,3866
************************** TOTAL EFFECT MODEL ****************************
Outcome: PI
Model Summary
R R-sq MSE F df1 df2 p
,5738 ,3292 ,8826 304,3120 1,0000 620,0000 ,0000
Model coeff se t p LLCI ULCI
constant 2,5953 ,1164 22,3008 ,0000 2,3667 2,8238
VI ,4433 ,0254 17,4445 ,0000 ,3934 ,4932
***************** TOTAL, DIRECT, AND INDIRECT EFFECTS ********************
Total effect of X on Y
Effect SE t p LLCI ULCI
,4433 ,0254 17,4445 ,0000 ,3934 ,4932
Direct effect of X on Y
Effect SE t p LLCI ULCI
,3370 ,0252 13,3498 ,0000 ,2874 ,3866
Indirect effect of X on Y
Effect Boot SE BootLLCI BootULCIPPRfin ,1063 ,0156 ,0777 ,1375
Partially standardized indirect effect of X on Y
Effect Boot SE BootLLCI BootULCIPPRfin ,0928 ,0131 ,0689 ,1196
Completely standardized indirect effect of X on Y
Effect Boot SE BootLLCI BootULCIPPRfin ,1376 ,0194 ,1021 ,1774
Ratio of indirect to total effect of X on Y
Effect Boot SE BootLLCI BootULCIPPRfin ,2398 ,0361 ,1767 ,3167
Ratio of indirect to direct effect of X on Y
Effect Boot SE BootLLCI BootULCIPPRfin ,3155 ,0641 ,2146 ,4635
R-squared mediation effect size (R-sq_med)
Effect Boot SE BootLLCI BootULCIPPRfin ,1673 ,0226 ,1238 ,2121
Normal theory tests for indirect effect
Effect se Z p
,1063 ,0141 7,5178 ,0000
******************** ANALYSIS NOTES AND WARNINGS *************************
Number of bootstrap samples for bias corrected bootstrap confidence intervals:
5000
Level of confidence for all confidence intervals in output:
95,00
NOTE: Some cases were deleted due to missing data. The number of such cases was:
66
NOTE: Kappa-squared is disabled from output as of version 2.16.

—— END MATRIX —–
Hypothesis 4c: Perceived psychological risk mediates the relationship between Visual Elements of package and Purchase Intent.

Descriptive Statistics
N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation
Perceived Risk Psychological 622 1,00 7,00 5,4437 1,26232
Valid N (listwise) 622 Run MATRIX procedure:
************* PROCESS Procedure for SPSS Release 2.16.3 ******************
Written by Andrew F. Hayes, Ph.D. www.afhayes.com
**************************************************************************
Model = 4
Y = PI
X = VI
M = PPRpsiSample size
622
**************************************************************************
Outcome: PPRpsiModel Summary
R R-sq MSE F df1 df2 p
,1025 ,0105 1,5793 6,5778 1,0000 620,0000 ,0106
Model coeff se t p LLCI ULCI
constant 2,9340 ,1557 18,8476 ,0000 2,6283 3,2397
VI -,0872 ,0340 -2,5647 ,0106 -,1539 -,0204
**************************************************************************
Outcome: PI
Model Summary
R R-sq MSE F df1 df2 p
,5830 ,3398 ,8700 159,3289 2,0000 619,0000 ,0000
Model coeff se t p LLCI ULCI
constant 2,8712 ,1449 19,8131 ,0000 2,5866 3,1557
PPRpsi -,0940 ,0298 -3,1547 ,0017 -,1526 -,0355
VI ,4351 ,0254 17,1543 ,0000 ,3853 ,4849
************************** TOTAL EFFECT MODEL ****************************
Outcome: PI
Model Summary
R R-sq MSE F df1 df2 p
,5738 ,3292 ,8826 304,3120 1,0000 620,0000 ,0000
Model coeff se t p LLCI ULCI
constant 2,5953 ,1164 22,3008 ,0000 2,3667 2,8238
VI ,4433 ,0254 17,4445 ,0000 ,3934 ,4932
***************** TOTAL, DIRECT, AND INDIRECT EFFECTS ********************
Total effect of X on Y
Effect SE t p LLCI ULCI
,4433 ,0254 17,4445 ,0000 ,3934 ,4932
Direct effect of X on Y
Effect SE t p LLCI ULCI
,4351 ,0254 17,1543 ,0000 ,3853 ,4849
Indirect effect of X on Y
Effect Boot SE BootLLCI BootULCIPPRpsi ,0082 ,0051 ,0012 ,0220
Partially standardized indirect effect of X on Y
Effect Boot SE BootLLCI BootULCIPPRpsi ,0072 ,0044 ,0011 ,0192
Completely standardized indirect effect of X on Y
Effect Boot SE BootLLCI BootULCIPPRpsi ,0106 ,0065 ,0016 ,0283
Ratio of indirect to total effect of X on Y
Effect Boot SE BootLLCI BootULCIPPRpsi ,0185 ,0114 ,0028 ,0497
Ratio of indirect to direct effect of X on Y
Effect Boot SE BootLLCI BootULCIPPRpsi ,0188 ,0120 ,0028 ,0523
R-squared mediation effect size (R-sq_med)
Effect Boot SE BootLLCI BootULCIPPRpsi ,0154 ,0096 ,0022 ,0407
Normal theory tests for indirect effect
Effect se Z p
,0082 ,0042 1,9324 ,0533
******************** ANALYSIS NOTES AND WARNINGS *************************
Number of bootstrap samples for bias corrected bootstrap confidence intervals:
5000
Level of confidence for all confidence intervals in output:
95,00
NOTE: Some cases were deleted due to missing data. The number of such cases was:
66
NOTE: Kappa-squared is disabled from output as of version 2.16.

—— END MATRIX —–