CST! ‘a 366 a Y N UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLICATIONS eM) IN : PSYCHOLOGY | i Livol. 3, No. Be pp. 61-72, plates [-3 January 30, 1919 ANALYSIS OF PACKAGE LABELS BY WALTER S. HELLER INTRODUCTION The object of this investigation was to ascertain what influence the label on a package has on a purchaser, and if possible to determine whether there is any logical relation between the quality of the contents and the wrapper. In an earlier experi- ment conducted by the writer, a group of subjects arranged according to choice twelve packages of brown laundry soap. They were permitted to use any basis of judgment they pleased, simply being informed that the price per cake was uniform. This arrangement was later compared with arrangements of the same soap in blank wrappers and later without any wrappers at all. The results showed that there is rather a high correlation between the various arrangements, and on analysis it was found that the two most important factors were: (1) familiarity, and (2) size and shape. The first of these was important in the case of three or four of the twelve brands, while the second determined the choice in all the other nine and to some extent with the three familiar brands. It was finally decided that if size and shape could be controlled and familiarity minimized, the results would show what influence was exerted by the labels. The endeavor to eliminate these factors led to the investigations herein reported. The material consisted of twelve brands of canned ‘‘yellow cling’’ peaches put up in two and one-half pound tins (pls. 1-3). 62 University of California Publications in Psychology [Vou 3 They were all the same size, all bore the name of the California Fruit Canners Association, and different only in brand and make-up of label. Peach labels were selected on account of the great variety obtainable. The twelve selected brands were dis- tributed among five qualities as follows: Quality 1 Special Extra 1 brand Quality 2 Extra 3 brands Quality 3 Extra Standard 3 brands Quality 4 Standard 3 brands Quality 5 Seconds 2 brands Total 12 brands As there was only one brand obtainable of the first quality, there was no choice. In the case of qualities 2, 3, and 4 from which there was considerable selection, the choice was made by taking what appeared to be the best one, a medium one, and a poor one. From quality 5, one was chosen which seemed to be the best, and one other which seemed to be the worst. The subjects for the experiment were shown the twelve cans, bearing their labels, and asked to make an arrangement accord- ing to preference. The cans were placed on a shelf a little above the level of the eye, in the endeavor to maintain store conditions. The same subjects were also to arrange the contents of the cans. For this purpose the peaches and juice were placed in saucers. There were twelve saucers, one for each brand. The subjects were to arrange these merely by appearance; they were not per- — mitted to taste the contents. PART. I The persons selected for observers in this experiment were fifty men and fifty women, most of them untrained subjects, having no knowledge of the experiments other than what was conveyed in the written directions. | Sheets containing the following questions were handed to them for preliminary information: ; 1919 | Heller: Analysis of Package Labels — 63 1. What experience, if any, have you had in purchasing canned peaches? 2. Make a list below, of as many brands of canned peaches as possible. The results showed that 34 per cent of the men and 28 per eent of the women had previous experience in purchasing canned peaches. Ninety per cent of the subjects mentioned one of our brands, Del Monte. Practically none mentioned any of the others. On completion of the preliminary test, the subject was given the following set of directions: | The experiment in which you have been called to take part is on the psychology of the package, wrapper and container. You will be shown twelve (12) brands of ‘‘Yellow Cling Peaches’’ under two conditions. In one condition the fruit in cans will be shown and in the other the fruit open. In both cases you are to arrange them from left to right, beginning with the first choice. A memory test was made as soon as the arrangements were completed, the directions for which were as follows: 1. Write down the names of all the peaches you can remember of the series just shown you. Hnter the item under one of the two heads, accord- ing to what you remember. (a) Brand. (b) Special feature (any feature of label you remember). 2. Which of these peaches shown, have you heard of before? 3. In the ease of arranging the cans, what was the basis of your judg- ment? Considering the fruit in the saucers, the arrangement accord- ing to position value* is as follows: Men Women Men and women Quality 1 3.26 2.60 2.93 Quality 2 5.86 Dot 5.61 Quality 3 yas 5.91 5.84 Quality 4 6.26 7.04 6.65 Quality 5 10.54 10.23 10.39 The results show that there is a very marked difference in appearance between ‘the various qualities, and that the observers, * By position value is meant the average position given by the group of subjects. If the choice were arbitrary, each would have a value of six and one-half, but as there is of course a choice, the position held by any one label might range from one up to twelve. The average position of any label will be near one or near twelve only in case the subjects agree very closely with one another. 64 University of California Publications in Psychology [Vou.3 unfamiliar as they were with the material, could not be deceived, which as we shall later see, was not the case with the labels. The position values show that there is a greater difference between qualities 1 and 2 and between 4 and 5 than between qualities 2,3 and 4. There are no noticeable sex differences. The following table shows the arrangement of the cans when they were arranged according to their labels: Name of Men and Memory Quality brand Men Women Women Men and women 1 Griffon 5.90 6.52 6.21 26.5% 2 Del Monte 2.78 1.92 2.35 75.5% 2 Acme 6.00 5.42 5.71 47.2% 2 Oak 7.92 (hres) 7.85 51.5% 3 Mission ~ 4.10 4.48 4.29 62.5% 3 Gold Seal 4.88 4.56 4,72 31.2% 3 Sweet Brier 6.44 7.10 6.77 40.5% + Banquet 7.38 8.78 8.08 65.5% 4 Swallow 7.84 8.38 8.11 47.0% + Bouquet 8.32 8.58 8.45 33.0% 5 Ideal 6.06 3.88 4.97 42.0% b Creole 10.32 10.66 10.49 65.7% The correlation of this arrangement (men and women com- bined), with the actual qualities is 0.48, showing that there is some relationship between the label and the contents; however, the subjects were far less correct in their judgment of the labels than in their judgment of the fruit itself. The analysis of this table shows that Del Monte comes first, probably because of its familiarity. The only important sex difference shows itself in the ease of Ideal, which is ranked second by the women and sixth by the men. The range of position value of the women is a little greater than that of the men, showing that the former are more alike or positive in their selection. On the whole men and women correlate so highly that the figures can be combined without detriment to the final results. The memory test was given to the observer after the com- pletion of the arrangements just referred to. The subjects were asked to enter what they remembered under two headings: (A) Name of brand—being explicit information; (B) Special feature remembered—being general information. If under either head- WNIV. GALIFR PUBL, (PSYCHOL, VOLS CRELEER ) Pe eae | : ears Bt Came saat PACKED SY fornia YELLOW CLING PEACHES | ==" YELLOW CLING PEACHES : CALIFORNIA FRUIT CANNERS a _ ASSOCIATION . "SAN FRANCISCO, ‘YAulowcuNg PEACHES =" YELLOW CLING PEACHES HET CONTENTS 1 pounD 13 OUNCES - SWEET BRIER BRAND @l ifornia Fruit @nners Association. ~ CAUPORMIA OWCIING FACHES YELLOW CLING PEACHES NET WEIGHT | LB. 14 02, Lee tenee NET Sines ' ‘6. 14 02, Digitized by the !hternet Archive in 2022 with funding from University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign Alternates httos://archive.org/details/analysisofoackagOOhell 1919] Heller: Analysis of Package Labels 65 ing the information was partly correct, only half credit was given. The data have been combined into a ae unit by taking the sum of the information, i.e., A + B +3 fui 5° and expressing it in per cent. The results show that the observer well remembers his first choice and also clearly remembers the very bad labels at the end of the list. In answer to the second question on the memory blank, ‘““Which of these peaches shown have you heard of before?’’ Del Monte receives over 50 per cent more responses than all the others combined. In reply to the third question, ‘‘In the case of arranging the cans, what was the basis of your judgment?’’ a great many factors or incentives are named, many of which are too com- plicated for analysis in such a study as this, but the following factors were frequently noted. 1. Familiarity 2. Color scheme 3. Simplicity 4. Richness 5. Appropriateness op) . Pleasingness. It appeared that if these factors could be eee controlled, different arrangements might result. PART II This part of the experiment deals with the arrangement of the labels used in Part I according to five explicit sets of direc- tions, each one containing one of the incentives, with the excep- tion of familiarity, referred to at the end of the last paragraph. Each set was arranged by thirty-seven women subjects, no one subject making more than one arrangement. Some of the sub- jects, however, had previously made the uncontrolled arrange- ‘ment; these were warned that the directions differed from the first by calling for a definite arrangement. 66 University of California Publications in Psychology (VoL. 3 The five sets of directions were as follows: 1 Arrange the twelve cans of peaches from left to right beginning with your first choice on the left according to color scheme. Place the one with the most effective color scheme on the extreme left, then the next most effective, and so on down to the one with the least effective color scheme. ’ 2 Arrange the twelve cans of peaches from left to right beginning with your first choice on the left according to the simplicity of the label. Place the one with the most simple label on the extreme left, then the next most simple, and so on down to the least simple. 3 Arrange the twelve cans of peaches from left to right beginning with your first choice on the left according to the richness of the label. Place the richest on the extreme left, then the next most rich, and so on down to the least rich. 4 Arrange the twelve cans of peaches from left to right beginning with your first choice on the left according to the appropriateness of the label. Place the one with the most appropriate label on the extreme left, then the next most appropriate, and so on down to the least appropriate. 5 Arrange the twelve cans of peaches from left to right beginning with your first choice on the left according to the pleasingness of the label as a whole, including design or picture, typographical arrangement and balance. Place the most pleasing one on the extreme left, then the next most pleasing, and so on down to the least pleasing. The position value for the different arrangements under the various captions is as follows: Tacentolled ‘ ieee : rete judgment Color Richness ness Simplicity ateness Del Monte 2.35 3.32 3.91 ac. 3.27 4.51 Mission 4.29 5.43 4.54 3.81 6.00 5.40 Gold Seal 4.72 5.81 3.97 5.13 6.30 5.05 Ideal 4.97 5.45 5.12 4.86 1.48° 5.32 Acme 5.71 5.02 6.06 5.75 2.35 6.00 Griiious) 7 6.21 7.70 4.87 6.64 6.37 6.86 Sweet Brier 6.77 5.79 6.93 6.08 7.10 6.27 Oak 7.65 6.94 7.09 5.43 6.37 T.L0 Banquet 8.08 8.64 8.60 10.43 ni be Ws §.46 Swallow 8.11 6.81 8.18 6.21 10.27 TOU Bouquet 8.45 8.02 8.21 8.62 9.30 7.13 Creole 10.49 9.02 10.30 11.32 Vota 9.60 UNL CALIRE PUBL? PSYOROL VOE. 3 PEL Cera) PAE NET WEIGHT 1LB8.140Z. ‘YELLOW CLING PEACHES CALIFORNIA i FRUIT CANNERS ASSOCIATION SAN FRANCISCO. CALIFORN : i S-R- ti, BRAT, OFFS, : ott N HERANCEEG, — CAL Bs GEOR VO AF TENNEY CANNING CO. ESN, CALIFOR YELLOW CLING PEACHES ai \' YELLOW CLI 1G PEACH NET CONTENTS 1 POUND 14 4 | poet ey te Pea =) | c' 5 (a fe THE ay a | > att OU EGRITY “Go ' he - \ - - 7 ; ft « « - is - ‘ i val an a = W's e- eee 7 7 ot “ 7 ps des 7 aa , @ ‘ 4 7 ~ a a 6 - “ 7 — a we — ‘A \ - * - n 1 fe aha? | a) Lz f o we, , es aaa - ee a es am s, oo - at = a & a " : . A a J a ‘ _ 4 = © 7 is - a hi ¥ “ La f ce’ Ve > = 4 — — : - a 7 . fr Se" 4— A 7 a 7 ef ol a gone a as a: 7 i. ar) aa @ ioe 7 —