Choose the Right Package Material

Which package texture is best?

It depends.

How to Apply

• Glossy = Fattening. Food in a glossy package seems fattier, perhaps because glossiness resembles greasiness (De Kerpel et al., 2020).
• Matte = Healthy. Glossy packages often contain unhealthy snacks (e.g., chips), while matte packages contain healthier snacks (e.g., crackers). Based on these real-world exposures, customers believe that food in matte packages are healthier and more natural (Ye et al., 2020; Marckhgott, & Kamleitner, 2019).
• Glass = Tasty. Food in glass packaging seems tastier (Balzarotti et al., 2015). Since glass packaging is more expensive, these products inherit perceived quality. And perhaps the heaviness of this packaging is conflated for the heaviness of the items, as if this food is more satiating.
• Rough = Masculine. Masculine scents are preferred on rough paper, whereas feminine scents are preferred on smooth paper (Krishna et al., 2010).

• No Packaging = Fresh. Do you need packaging at all? Maybe not. Remove any outside material if freshness is important: "packaging acts as a symbolic barrier that separates the product from nature, decreasing perceived product naturalness and leading to less favorable product responses” (Szocs, Williamson, & Mills, 2022)

• De Kerpel, L., Kobuszewski Volles, B., & Van Kerckhove, A. (2020). Fats are glossy but does glossiness imply fatness? The influence of packaging glossiness on food perceptions. Foods, 9(1), 90.
• Marckhgott, E., & Kamleitner, B. (2019). Matte matters: When matte packaging increases perceptions of food naturalness. Marketing Letters, 30(2), 167-178.
• Szocs, C., Williamson, S., & Mills, A. (2022). Contained: Why it’s better to display some products without a package. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 50(1), 131-146.
• Ye, N., Morrin, M., & Kampfer, K. (2020). From glossy to greasy: The impact of learned associations on perceptions of food healthfulness. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 30(1), 96-124.