The effects of puffery in food packaging on consumers' responses via persuasion knowledge: role of food type and picture type

Abstract

Purpose

Food packaging pictures are one of the most important extrinsic cues for consumers to evaluate food products before purchasing. Over the past decades, marketers have used exaggerated pictures to attract consumers' attention, enhance their attitude toward a product and increase their purchase intention. This study examined the interplay of “puff-up” product picture, food type and picture type in influencing consumers' responses via persuasion knowledge.

Design/methodology/approach

The research comprises two 2 × 2 factorial experiments. Study 1 tested the interaction effect of puffery (high vs low) and food type (utilitarian vs. hedonic) on consumers' responses using two fictitious brands of prepared food, whereas Study 2 tested the interaction effect of puffery (high vs. low) and picture type (ingredients vs. cooked food) using a fictitious brand of Chinese delicacy.

Findings

Results demonstrated that the degree of picture puffery did not influence consumers' responses to utilitarian food and ingredient image. Conversely, consumers were sensitive to puffery when they see hedonic food and cooked-food image. Our findings also suggested that consumers' persuasion knowledge mediates the relationship between puffery and their responses.

Practical implications

The presented findings facilitate marketers to know consumers' attitude about food puffery pictures.

Originality/value

This research is one of the first efforts to empirically explore the influences of persuasion knowledge on food puffery pictures. The importance of this work is underscored by the fact that a growing number of visual exaggerations are adopted on food packaging.

Citation

Huang, L.-S., Huang, W.-J. and Wu, Y.-H. (2023), "The effects of puffery in food packaging on consumers' responses via persuasion knowledge: role of food type and picture type", British Food Journal, Vol. 125 No. 3, pp. 937-955. https://doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-10-2021-1112