(Montreal) Are we more inclined to taste vegetarian products if they are called differently? A Concordia study indicates yes.
Posted at 11:28
The presentation of the product can make all the difference when it comes to breaking into consumers who also eat meat, according to the data collected.
Indeed, surveyed participants who were shown a “plant-based” burger tended to consider it more environmentally friendly and healthier than those who were shown the same product, but labeled “meat substitute”. “. They were also more open to trying it.
However, this discovery no longer holds water when we add a variable that may seem trivial: the color of the packaging.
Indeed, a “plant-based” ground beef decorated with green is considered less ecological than the same product on a red background.
Additionally, “the product that had the ‘meat substitute’ descriptor and was red was seen to be better for the environment and participants had higher intentions to try the product than pretty much any other combination.” said one of the co-authors of the study, associate professor of marketing at Concordia University Caroline Roux, in a telephone interview.
According to a 2019 Angus Reid poll, only 39% of Canadians have tasted this kind of product. Among those aged 18 to 35, this proportion rises to 58%, and 48% say they are ready to try if they have not already done so.
The Force of Habit
“It really surprised us,” she said, given that the color green tends to be associated with plants, while red conjures up images of animal meat.
The professor put forward several hypotheses to explain these results.
Other studies already suggest that we naturally tend to gravitate toward the packaging designs we’re used to, she said.
“Very early on, when alternative proteins were brought to market, there were a lot of brands that leaned towards images, descriptions and colors that were more animalistic, precisely to convince consumers who ate meat to transition,” she recalled. Thus, the association could have been made there.
The first generations of protein substitutes, such as “tofu, tempeh or legumes”, were marketed with vegetable references instead, to target vegetarians and vegans.
Another possibility would be that the physical presentation “changes the reference category to which the participants will compare the product”.
“It’s rare that as humans we will evaluate something in a vacuum,” explained Professor Roux. We’ll try to find a benchmark and we’ll say it’s more or less healthy than that. So when you see ‘plant-based’ and green, I feel like the participants were basically thinking of similar products or stuff like tofu,” which made the food being tested less impressive.
Conversely, “when participants saw red and ‘meat substitute’, they were probably thinking animal meat, and there the difference was much bigger in their heads.”
Unexpected effects
“My main advice is not to rely on any preconceived knowledge you might have about what you think is a color association or a name association,” the professor concluded, warning that companies “could be surprised at the effect” caused by their choices.
After all, “a red item in the vegan section would stand out a lot more than a red item in the burger section and vice versa.” A green product in the vegan section is going to lose out with the competition, while in the ground meat section it would really stand out.”
The interplay between multiple variables, like name and color, can also create unexpected results, so it’s best to experiment before launching a product.
Methodology
The article “Exploring how product descriptors and packaging colors impact consumers’perceptions of plant-based meat alternative products” was published in November 2021 in the scientific journal Appetite. The authors are Daniella Sucapane, Caroline Roux and Kamila Sobol.
The article contains the results of three studies. The first (149 participants) confirms the symbolic association between the color green and plants, and between the color red and meat, in the minds of consumers. The second (148 participants) focuses only on product names. The third (274 participants) explores the interactions between color and appellation.
The product used as an example came from the company Lightlife.
People who were already vegetarians, vegans or who were already familiar with the product were excluded from the study so as not to distort the data.