See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/333129539

Packaging Features and Consumer Buying Behavior Towards Packaged Food

Items

Article  in  SSRN Electronic Journal · January 2019

DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.3381882

CITATIONS READS
2 714

2 authors, including:

Danish Ahmed Siddiqui

University of Karachi
382 PUBLICATIONS   318 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Entrepreneurial leadership and it's impact on employee performance View project

Mphil research View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Danish Ahmed Siddiqui on 11 February 2020.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Packaging features and consumer buying behavior towards
packaged food items

Muhammad Usama Ahsan Ansari 1

Research Scholar
Karachi University Business School, University of Karachi, Pakistan
[email protected]

Dr. Danish Ahmed Siddiqui

Associate Professor
Karachi University Business School, University of Karachi, Pakistan
[email protected]

ABSTRACT
This study aimed to determine the effects of packaging attributes on consumers’ buying behavior.
Specifically, to investigate the effect of packaged food’s graphics, color, size, shape, product
information and/or packaging material on consumers’ buying behavior in Pakistan. Data was
collected through the used of questionnaire from 300 individuals and was analyzed through
Confirmatory Factor Analysis and Structural Equation Modeling. The study found a significant
relationship between graphics colors, packaging size, shape, product information of packaging
material with consumers’ buying behavior. The study concluded that the packaging attributes
are examined, are contributed in communicating product quality that affects purchase behavior.
The study recommends that food manufacturers must understand the consumer response towards
their packaging and integrate their input into designing a better packaging by innovations. This
can be achieved by involving consumer directly in designing the final packaging of product
through their response.

Keywords: Product packaging, Buying behavior, Consumer’ behavior, SEM, CFA, Pakistan

1 Corresponding Author

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3381882

 1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background
Product is a combination of tangible and intangible goods and services offers to a customer for
sale. It is the idea, method, information, service or object created as a result of a process and
serves a need or satisfies a wish. Consumers are very good at finding new products that fulfill
their needs and demands. The buying behavior is easily identified through consumer’s attraction
towards product, perception of consumer, preference of consumer.
Product is made up of different elements: quality, protect ability, fulfilling the consumer’s need
and packaging. Packaging plays the main role for catching the consumer’s attraction. ‘Packaging
is the container for a product – encompassing in physical appearance of the container and
including the design, color, shape labeling and material used.’
Packaging has a huge role to play in the positioning of products. Packaging design shapes
consumer perception and can be the determining factor in point-of-purchase decisions which
characterize the majority of shopping occasions.
In recent years, the business environment is growing highly competitive and rapidly changing in
today’s world. The marketing environment has become interestingly complex and competitive. A
product’s packaging is something which all buyers experience and which has strong potential to
engage the majority of the target market. Thus, packaging is sometimes used as the promotional
tool by the companies. It stimulates impulse buying behavior and reduces marketing and
advertisement cost of the product in modern marketing environment. In addition to its benefits in
terms of reach, some marketers believe that packaging is actually more influential than
advertising in influencing consumers, as it has a more direct impact on how they perceive and
experience the product.
“In most cases, the experience has been that pack design are more likely to influence the
consumer perception of the brand.”
Packaging features attract consumer’s attention to specific product, sharpens its image and
influences consumers perception about the product (Rundh,2005). The packaging features of a
product gives a unique value to the products and works as a tool of differentiation and hence
stimulates consumer buying behavior (Underwood, Klein & Burke,2001). For products with low
advertising support, packaging takes on an even more significant role as the key vehicle for
communicating the brand positioning.

1.2 Problem statement:

In the previous decades, packaging of food products has become an important marketing tool.
Packaging also shapes the expectations and perception of the consumer in regards to product and
gives manufacturers the opportunity to persuade the consumers to make purchasing decision.
Considering packaging features have a vast impact up on consumers buying behavior. This will
present challenges to local marketers. Packaging designs which are not specifically optimized for
the specific consumers will result in lower sales as well as influence the buying behavior of

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3381882

consumers. Understanding of the consumer behavior which is affected by innovative packaging
and product design is necessary for local marketers to have competitive advantage over their
international competitors in the business world.

In order to reach this understanding that packaging attributes put drastic impact on the buying
behavior of consumers for packaged food, these issues must be considered.

1.3 GAP ANALYSIS

Various researches have been conducted to know the impact of packaging on consumers buying
behavior. Every research has a focus on particular aspect supporting similar conclusions.
However, there are some gaps are being identified. These gaps vary in terms of targeted
population, region, attributes and product. This research emphasized to full these gaps through
unmentioned product and packaging.

Table 1.1 Gap analysis

Researcher Focus of the Results Gaps Focus of the

study current study
Ares, Deliza, Influence of Consumer Only focused on Focused on
Besio & consumers reactions on consumer’s packaging
Gimenez (2010). attitude towards packaging involvement features and
packaging features. more than discussed
features of milk packaging individually.
deserts. features.
Hollywood Attitude towards Preference to Only focused on Other than
(2013). milk packaging plastic containers packaging packaging
material. in composition to material used for material, this
glass and packaging milk. study emphasize
cardboard. on other
packaging
features like
color , graphics,
shape, size and
product
information
Kuvykaite, Impact of Consumer’s Focused a Focused on each
Dovaliene, packaging purchasing packaging packaging
Navickiene features on decision is features features
(2009). consumer dependent on correlation to correlated with
purchasing consumer’s time pressure, buyin behavior
decision of milk involvement, involvement and for packaged
and washing time pressure and characteristics of food products.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3381882

 powder. the analyzed consumer.
individual
characteristics
Behzad (2011) Impact of color Color is an Only focused Focused on every
and graphics for excellent source product packaging
promotionof of information preference using feature related to
products. for colors and consumer’s
communication graphics of the behavior.
with consumers packaging.
in positive or
negative manner.
Adam & Ali Expiry date of Expiry date is Only focused on includes all the
(2014) packaged milk. positively expiry date that product
correlated with is written on information and
purchasing packaging of other packaging
decision of milk. features not only
consumers. the expiry date.

1.4 Objectives of the study:

Packaging of the products has the positive impact upon the consumers buying behavior. In this
study, we emphasized upon the presentation of product is related towards selling of product and
how the companies make new ways to get the attraction of consumers. We specifically targeted
the adult population of Karachi.
The study was conducted through some specific objectives as follows:
 To determine the effect of packaging graphics and color on consumers buying behavior
in Karachi.
 To determine the effect of packaging size and shape on consumers buying behavior in
Karachi.
 To determine the effect of product information written on packaging on consumers
buying behavior in Karachi.
 To determine the effect of packaging material on consumers buying behavior in Karachi.

1.4 Significance
The study would help food manufacturers in designing their product packaging strategies as it
seems to have a strong relationship of product information with purchasing behavior. Different
packaging features like colors & graphics, shape & size, packaging material and product
information affects the consumer buying behavior.
Furthermore, future researchers can formulate this study for further examination of every feature
and its effect on product packaging, explanation of impact of packaging features in relation with
other categories of product or conduction of any comparative study to possibly identifying
different effects of packaging features on a variety of similar or different products.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3381882

1.6 Research questions:
The research was conducted through following research questions:
 What is the effect of packaging graphics and color on consumers buying behavior in
Karachi?
 What is the effect of packaging size and shape on consumers buying behavior in Karachi?
 What is the effect of product information written on packaging on consumers buying
behavior in Karachi?
 What is the effect of packaging material on consumers buying behavior in Karachi?

2. LITERATURE REVIEW

Rita Kuykaite (2009) found packaging attracts consumer’s attention to particular brand, enhances
its image, and influences consumer’s perception about the product. Also, packaging imparts
unique value to products. (Underwood, Klein &Burke,2001: Silayoi &Speece, 2004) found
packaging works as a tool of differentiation, i.e. helps consumers to choose the product from
wide range of similar products, stimulates consumer’s buying behavior. Thus package performs
an important role in marketing communication and could be treated as one of the most important
factors influencing consumer’s purchase of product, its elements and their impact on consumer’s
buying behavior became a relevant issue.
Rita Kuykaite (2009) also concluded that packaging could be treated as one of the most valuable
tool in today’s marketing communication, necessitating more detail analysis of its elements and
impact on consumer’s purchase decision can be revealed by analyzing an importance of its
separate elements for consumer’s choice. Alice Louw (2006) studied The Power of Packaging
concluded that right packaging can help a brand carve a unique position in the marketplace and
in the minds of consumers. L Renaud (2007) worked on the influence of Eco-Labeling on
consumer’s behavior. The main objective of this study was to assess the relative importance of
labeling in packaging compared to other product attributes (like brand, price etc.) for consumer’s
buying decisions. The most important result of this analysis is the significant willingness to pay
for packaging energy efficient products. Bytyqi Hysen, Vegara Mensur (2008) analyzed
consumer’s buying behavior in regard to dairy products in Kosovo. It was concluded that the
packaging has great effect on purchase of dairy products.
Packages are found to attract attention (Underwood et al.,2001; Garber et al., 2000; Goldberg et
al.,1999; Schoormans &Robben 1997). In fact, Goldberg et al. (1999) found that by dismissing
such non verbal signs as colors, the attention to verbal signs can be increased. Pictures on
packaging are emphasized to attract attention, particularly when consumers are not very familiar
with the brands (Underwood et al.,2001).
Furthermore, packaging are claimed to attract attention when their appearances are not typical
within a product class (Garber et al.,2000; Schoormans &Robben 1997). In other words, past

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3381882

research has discovered that deviating packaging attract attention. Other studies show that
devoting packaging colors and shapes attract attention (Garber et al.,2000; Schoormans &
Robben,1997. Underwood et al. (2001) on the other hand, found that pictures on packages attract
attention particularly in cases when consumers are less familiar with the brand. Studies that have
focused on other single signs that pictures on packaging have found that single packaging sign as
colors (Gordon et al., 1994), brand names ( Rigaux-Bricmont, 1981), and materials ( McDaniel
&Baker, 1997) convey brand meaning. Pires Gon , Claves ,Ricardo (2008) worked on product
characteristics and quality perception. According to him, when they choose among competing
products consumers are faced with quality and product performance uncertainly. Hence, they
rely on cues as extrinsic attributes, for instance brand. Price packaging and warranty, as signals
of perceived quality. Liang Lu (2008), elaborated that packaging is an important part of the
product that not only serves a functional purpose, but also acts as mean of communicative
information of the products and brand characters. Packaging must be functional; it must meant to
protect the products in good storage, in shipment and often in use. Besides, it has also the
function that can give consumers the ease of access and use on the purpose of convenience.
Another research conducted by (Rundh,2005) explaining the multifaceted dimensions and try to
supply or provide smart tips for establishing a range between promoting tools & promoting
supply.
Graphics and colors play an important role in marketing of a product. Ares, Deliza & Gimenez
(2010), conducted a research on 60 participants in Uruguy in buying of chocolates deserts in
which, packaging graphics & colors were found to be the highest significant regardless of
consumer involvement with the product. Chocolates with brown color rather than the black and
those with pictures of milk deserts were associated with positive impact in buying of product.
In another Marshall, Staurt & Bell (2006) found that the younger children were likely to choose
products with then color preferences. This conclusion is also supported by Nawaz & Asad (2012)
A study conducted on size of packaging in Sweden by Rundh (2013) showed that changes in
household sizes lead the changes in the product size purchased. Another research by Silayor
(2004) conducted in Thailand showed that small packaging size is perceived by buyers as for
small family while larger packaging are seen as waste of product for small families.
Agariya (2012) conducted a quantitative investigation in India on packaging shape and
consumer’s behavior. This showed that an innovative packaging may help the consumer
selection and identification of any product. A research by Silayor & Speece (2004) in Thailand
conducted that product with a shape that was straight had a positive utility in comparison to
curved shaped product and the same result was observed for classic designed packaging in
contrast to colorful design.
Some study focused on packaging material. For instant, Hollywood (2013) did an analysis in UK
on the perception of milk based on the packaging material. According to the investigation glass
as packaging material is preferred more than card boards and plastic. Kuykaite, Dovaliene and
Navickiene (2009) investigated on the impact of packaging elements on consumer purchasing

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3381882

decision in Lithuania. The findings of the study showed that material of the product was the most
influential visual elements that affected the purchasing of washing powder and milk.
A study did by Ahmed, Parmar and Amin (2014) revealed that consumers can easily change their
purchasing decisions regarding packaging material dependent upon different situations.
Packaging is the jar or a container or a protection for a product.
Product information written on packaging can also affect buyers’ behavior. Spink, Singh and
Singh (2011) conducted a research in which they investigated if consumers could assimilate and
understand the information written on the container of the product in UK with 233 participants.
They found that packaging information did affect the consumer purchasing behavior and
sometimes wrong interpretation of information on the package can affect the selling of any
product. Similarly, Parathiraja and Ariyawardana (2003) looked at how nutritional information
on packaging affected the purchasing behavior of consumers India. According to the study
consumers referred to the nutritional information so as to make a buying decision this is because
of health consciousness. Most of the respondents gave the positive response for paying more to
access the nutritional information on the food products. Adam and Ali (2014) in their research
conducted that expiry date of packaged milk is positively correlated with the consumer buying
behavior in Pakistan. This is shown that consumer look at expiry dates of packaged milk before
purchasing. Thus, products with prolong duration of expiry has the influence upon purchasing.

2.1 Conceptual Framework

According to Kuvykaite, Dovaliene and Navickiene (2009) packaging features indicates a set of
various elements communicating to a consumer. In this study, the independent variable is
packaging features which comprised of four variables: graphics and colors, size and shape,
product information and packaging material. The dependent variable is consumer buying
behavior. Following figure shows the relationship between the packaging features and consumer
buying behavior.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3381882

 Figure 2.1 Conceptual Framework

2.1.1 Consumer buying behavior:

The buying behavior of consumer is a complicated and rapidly changing affair which is very
difficult to define. Engel, Blackwell and Miniard (1986) gave a definition of consumer buying
behavior as some actions performed by an individual for obtaining, using and disposing
economical goods and services including processes of decision making that comes before buying
behavior. Consumer behavior can also be defined as the selection and buying of the products and
services by the use of available sources to fulfill the needs and wishes. (Schiffman and Kanuk
2000).
Egan (2007) presented the study that understand the behavior of consumers. According to his
study, the knowledge of the consumer behavior can tributes to the economy in a positive
manners. Consumer behaviors however considered as non-static, it is constantly changing as the
purchasing features of consumer change with respect to time according to consumer’s needs. It is
difficult to pickup the reasons to show the preference of any product given by the consumers.
Although great effort have been done to understand the buying behavior (kotler, Wong, Saunders
and Armstrong 2005). Jobber (1995) classified that factors influencing consumer buying
behavior as economic, social, personal and technical. Where economical are concerned with cost,

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3381882

social with effect of purchasing on the consumers in relation with others. Personal factor is
concerned with services and products are related with comfort, reliability convenience and
durability.
Packaging influences the consumer buying behavior by its different features and every feature
influences the buying behavior in its own way. This study therefore seeks to determine the
impact on buying behavior of packaged food productions in Karachi.

2.1.2 Packaging
The consumer buying behavior is dependent on the packaging and its features. Packaging
elements like packaging color, background image, font style, design of wrapper, printed
information and innovation is taken as predictors. Due to increase of self-service and changing
consumer’s lifestyle the interest in package as a tool of sale promotion and stimulator of
impulsive buying behavior is growing increasingly. So, packaging performs an important role in
marketing communications, especially in the point of sale and could be treated as one of the most
important factors influencing consumer’s purchase decision.
Predergast and Pitt (1996) review the basic functions of packaging and define them by their role
in logistics or marketing. The logistical function of packaging is mainly to protect the product
during movement through distribution channels. In marketing function, packaging provides an
attractive method to convey messages about product attributes to consumers at the point of sale.
It may be difficult to separate these two packaging functions, as they are usually needed. The
packaging sells the product by attracting attention and communicating, and also allows the
product to be contained, apportioned, unitized and protected.
Packaging graphics & color: As the consumer first attracted visibly so the graphics & color of
a product plays an important role in attracting consumers. Graphics and color makes the
differentiation between similar competitor products. So, they make the consumer to take
purchasing decision quickly.
Packaging size & shape: The size and shape of a product also play an important role in the
consumer’s decision making. The large size and beautiful design packaging can effect impulse
buying. The large size of packaging gets the consumers attraction quickly while smaller
packaging does not because of visually prominent elements.
Product information: The information about the product on packaging plays vital role. The
nutritional labeling can make a buying decision. The expiry date mention on packaging also
produces positive impact on consumer buying behavior. The information of raw materials and
mode of manufacturing and preservation makes consumer satisfied and unsatisfied towards the
product.
Packaging material: The material used for packaging also plays vital role in attracting
consumers. High quality packaging can influence the consumer’s buying behavior. It not only
enhances the shelf life of products. It protects the product from external environment and it
makes product easily capable of shipment.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3381882

2.1.3 Hypothesis .
H1 there is an impact of graphics and colors of packaging on consumer buying behavior.
H2 there is an impact of size and shape of the packaging on consumer buying behavior
H3 there is an impact of product information written on packaging on consumer buying behavior
H4 there is an impact of packaging material of food items on consumer buying behavior

3. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1 Research design

We conducted this research with the help of questionnaire and from the initial stages, to the final
designing of questionnaire; we conducted our research through exploratory research as well as
descriptive research. The questionnaire of the study was adapted from a previous research
conducted by Betty Jepchirchir Kosgei in Kenya (2018). The data was collected through
questionnaire given manually and sending by e-mail.

3.2 Sample:
The primary interest of the sample was the adult population of Pakistan, people living in
different cities and regional areas were inquired. The study involved 300 participants, mainly
from different localities of Karachi.

Table 3.1 Socio and demographic information of respondents

Variable Frequency Population (%)
Gender
Male 141 47.0
Female 159 53.0
Education
Primary 6 2.0
Secondary 22 7.3
Collage 38 12.7
University 234 78.0
Job status
Student 56 2.0
Employed 201 7.3
Unemployed 39 12.7
Retired 4 78.0
Age
18 – 29 140 46.7
30 – 49 111 37.0
50 – 55 37 12.3
Above 55 12 4.0
Income

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3381882

 18,000 – 25,000 66 22.0
30,000 – 45,000 78 26.0
50,000 – 75,000 73 24.3
N/A 83 27.7
Marital Status
Single 148 49.3
married 142 47.3
others 6 2.0
specify 4 1.3

As shown in table 3.1 the participants of this sample are mostly females 159 in numbers i-e 53%
and males are 141i-e 47%. 78% of the respondent education level is university, 12.7% of the
respondent education level is collage, 7.3% are from secondary level of education and 2% are
from primary level of education. The respondents are mostly employed with 67%, 18.7% of the
participants are students, 13% of the respondents are unemployed and 1.3% are retired.
The major age group was 18-29 years old with 46.7%, 37% of respondents are 30-49 years old,
while age group 50-55 years and above 55 years are 12.3% and 4% respectively. The income
level of 26% the participants are in 30000 to 45000, 24.3% of the participants are in 50000 to
75000, 22% are in 18000 to 25000 and 7% of the participants N/A. The marital status consist of
49.3% are singles, 47.3% are married while others and specify are 2% and 1.3% respectively.

3.3 Descriptive Statistic

Table 3.2 descriptive statistics
Std.
Mean Deviation
Std.
Statistic Error Statistic
How often do you buy packaged foods 3.3500 .07789 1.34916
The color of food packaging influences my purchase decision. 3.5533 .07068 1.22426
The color combination that can easily be remembered influences 3.3000 .07880 1.36487
my purchase decision.
Attractive packaging influences my purchase decision. 3.3267 .07901 1.36853
The picture quality of the product packaging influences my 3.4833 .08636 1.49572
purchase decision.
The picture of the product packaging that reflects the fact that it is 3.5633 .08498 1.47192
high quality influences my purchase decision.
Shape of food packaging influences my purchase decision 3.5033 .08020 1.38916
Type of opening of food packaging influences my purchase 3.6800 .06853 1.18700
decision.
The packaging of the product in a refill format in conjunction 3.6400 .07384 1.27900
with different affordable sizes influences my purchase decision.
Size of food packaging (i.e. individual packages vs family size) 3.5867 .06783 1.17491
influences my purchase decision.
Food Packaging of various sizes influences my purchase decision. 3.6600 .06982 1.20938

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3381882

 Food packaging that shows that the products are enriched with 3.6267 .07255 1.25667
quality influences my purchase decision.
Food packaging modification influences my purchase decision. 3.7300 .07339 1.27115
Food product packaging labels influence my purchase decision. 2.3967 .05402 .93572
Too small to read food products labels influence my purchase 2.4333 .05876 1.01768
decision.
The font used in writing ingredient composition of food products 2.3467 .05425 .93956
that is legible and could be easily interpreted by customers
influences my purchase decision.
Material quality of food product packaging influences my 1.9600 .05080 .87995
purchase decision.
Versatility of food product packaging (i.e. can reuse the package) 2.2600 .05722 .99113
influences my purchase decision.
Safety of food product packaging influences my purchase 2.0333 .05360 .92831
decision.
Food product packaging material influences my purchase 1.9000 .04896 .84798
decision.

As from the table 3.2 the mean value 3 denoted as neutral, above 3 indicates as agree and below
3 value indicates that respondents are disagreeing the questions, in above table it is clear that the
respondents are agreeing to the questions regarding consumer buying behavior, graphics and
colors of packaging and size and shape of the packaging as the value of mean is above 3. While
respondents are disagreeing to the questions regarding product information and packaging
material as the mean value is below 3
.
3.4 Statistical tools:
The research involved statistical technique of structural equation modeling. The SEM analysis
tells the nature and extent of the independent variables with dependent the dependent variables.
Moreover, it helps in decision making and makes predictions of future.
The correlation analysis used in this study tells the association among the variables whether they
are weak, moderate and strongly associated to each other. This ensures the environment for
further interpretation and exploring new dimensions within the context of research.

3.5 Inferential statistics

To measure the packaging features and consumer buying behavior towards packaged food items,
Several test were applied to check the reliability effects. 32 items were used through which an
exploratory analysis was conducted. Inferential statistics helps to make inferences and conclusive
evidence from the sample data drawn from a population. Exploratory Factor analysis with the
help of SPSS is used to reduce large number of variables to the most important ones
(Büyüköztürk, 2007; Tavşancıl, 2002). Results from the remaining items produced a reliable
model and considered for reliability and validity test and path analysis.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3381882

3.6 Reliability statistics

Table 3.3 Reliability statistics

Cronbach's
Alpha N of Items
0.889 32

Table 3.4: Reliability Scores (N=300)

No. of Number of Cronbach’s

Variables
Items respondents Alpha
Consumer buying behavior 7 300 0.853
Graphics and colors 7 300 0.840
Size and shape 8 300 0.867
Product information 5 300 0.701
Packaging material 5 300 0.724

Cronbach’s alpha is a measure used to assess the reliability, or internal consistency, of a set of
scale or test items. In other words, the reliability of any given measurement refers to the extent to
which it is a consistent measure of a concept, and Cronbach’s alpha is one way of measuring the
strength of that consistency.
In above, table 3.4 the values of reliability test show acceptable results with all items included.
The reliability of all the variables including dependent and independent variables is greater than
the cut off value that is 0.70 which was good (Santos, 1999). In above table overall Cronbach’s
Alpha of the questionnaire was 0.889. Which is significant as it is greater than the cut off value
which is 0.7 so all values are acceptable.

3.7 Confirmatory factor analysis

Confirmatory factor analysis was performed using AMOS. Factor analysis was employed to
reduce large number of variables to extract most underlying variables called factor. Confirmatory
factor analysis is a useful method to examine the variability among observed variables and
excerpt variability from items and load them into a common factor. The researcher uses
knowledge of the theory, empirical research, or both, postulates the relationship pattern a priori
and then tests the hypothesis statistically. Diana D (2001).

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3381882

 Table 3.5 Standardized regression weights
Latent variable Item label Item description Standardized
regression weights
GC1 The color of food packaging influences my purchase decision. 0.398
GC2 The color combination that can easily be remembered influences my 0.378
purchase decision.
Graphics and GC3 The color combination that makes the product stand out among other 0.479
colors of competitive products influences my purchase decision.
packaging GC4 Attractive packaging influences my purchase decision. 0.592
GC5 The picture quality of the product packaging influences my purchase 0.842
decision.
GC6 The appetizing standard of the picture quality of the product 0.843
influences my purchase decision.
GC7 The picture of the product packaging that reflects the fact that it is 0.833
high quality influences my purchase decision.
SS1 Shape of food packaging influences my purchase decision 0.571
SS2 Type of opening of food packaging influences my purchase decision. 0.578
SS3 The packaging of the product in a refill format in conjunction with 0.666
different affordable sizes influences my purchase decision.
Size and shape of SS4 Size of food packaging (i.e. individual packages vs family size) 0.726
the packaging influences my purchase decision.
SS5 Food Packaging of various sizes influences my purchase decision. 0.641
SS6 Food products that are packaged in a unique manner that could aid 0.774
storage and preservation influences my purchase decision.
SS7 Food packaging that shows that the products are enriched with 0.742
quality influences my purchase decision.
SS8 Food packaging modification influences my purchase decision. 0.693
PI1 Food product packaging labels influence my purchase decision. 0.449
PI2 Too small to read food products labels influence my purchase 0.573
decision.
Product PI3 The font used on the food product packaging is legible and can be 0.554
information understood by customers influences purchase decision.
PI4 The font used on food products that attract my attention from 0.591
distance influences my purchase decision.
PI5 The font used in writing ingredient composition of food products that 0.675
is legible and could be easily interpreted by customers influences my
purchase decision.
PM1 Material quality of food product packaging influences my purchase 0.317
decision.
PM2 Versatility of food product packaging (i.e. can reuse the package) 0.786
Packaging influences my purchase decision.
material PM3 Safety of food product packaging influences my purchase decision. 0.645
PM4 Ability to recycle food products packaging influences my purchase 0.776
decision.
PM5 Food product packaging material influences my purchase decision. 0.350

The above table 3.5 shows standardized factor loading for each item and shows the association
between individual items with the extract construct. Factor loading for each item depicts
reasonable relationship with the underlying construct.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3381882

 Figure 3.1 Confirmatory Factor Analysis using AMOS software

3.8 Evaluating measurement model fitness

To evaluate the fitness of the proposed model, Amos delivers a set of useful indices that are used
to determine the fitness and validity of the hypothesized model. Out of different significant
indices, root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA), goodness of fit index (GFI), Chi-
Square, CMIN/DF, adjusted goodness of fit index (AGFI), and comparative fit indices were

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3381882

observed to determine the authenticity of the research model. The discussed indices shows the
degree to which constructs are related to one another. Table no 7 and figure 1 demonstrate the
resultant values.

Model Fit Resultant Value Threshold

CMIN/DF 2.021 < 3 good ;< 5 Acceptable
CFI 0.896 Closer to 1 ; good
GFI 0.877 >0.90
AGFI 0.850 > 0.80
RMR 0.095 < 0.06
RMSEA 0.058 < 0.08
PCLOSE 0.027 > 0.05
Table 3.6 Model Fitness Test

The measured values of CMIN/DF, AGFI and RMSEA are lying in threshold level, but PCLOSE
is 0.027 while CFI, GFI, are below threshold level and RMR is above the threshold level but it is
still acceptable.

3.9 Structural Equation Modeling

To test the study hypothesis we have used the structural equation model (SEM). Moreover, to
evaluate the indirect and direct effects of all the constructs the testing was done. SEM
combines both regression analysis and factor analysis. SEM consists of seven major stages, from
developing the model, constructing path diagram causal relationship, building and modifying
measurement model and finally model fit (Hair et al., 2006). A structural equation model consist
of an observed variable (OV) and latent variable (LV). The relationships of observes and latent
variables in SEM are shown using path diagram (Gefen 2003 , Tong 2007). SEM integrates both
path and factor analyses including multiple observed variables or indicators for every unobserved
variable as in factor analysis and specific paths connecting the unobserved variables in path
analysis (Tong 2007). In order to check the all direct and indirect effects, a technique has been
implemented which is known as bootstrapping (Shrout& Bolger, 2002). Additionally, the p
values in the table depicts about the acceptance and rejection level by seeing the null hypothesis
that depends on the upper and lower bounds of the confidence intervals.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3381882

 Figure 3.2 Path model designed in the AMOS software

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3381882

3.10 Evaluating Measurement Model Fitness
Goodness of fit is employed to determine the model rejection or acceptance for further analysis.
Kline (2005) recommended the four most commonly reported goodness of fit tests are chi
square; Goodness of Fit Index (GFI), Normed Fit Index (NFI),Comparative Fit Index (CFI), and
Root Mean Square Error of Approximation(RMSEA). Out of different significant indices, root
mean square error of approximation (RMSEA), goodness of fit index (GFI), Chi-Square,
CMIN/DF, adjusted goodness of fit index (AGFI), and comparative fit indices were observed to
determine the authenticity of the research model. The discussed indices shows the degree to
which constructs are related to one another. Table no 8 and figure 2 demonstrate the resultant
values
.
Model Fit Resultant Value Threshold
CMIN/DF 2.389 < 3 good ;< 5 Acceptable
CFI 0.833 Closer to 1 ; good
GFI 0.821 >0.90
AGFI 0.791 > 0.90
RMSEA 0.068 < 0.08
RMR 0.201 < 0.08
P-Value 0.000 <0.05
PCLOSE 0.000 > 0.05
Table 3.7 Model Fitness Test

There are different parameters to evaluate the goodness of a fit model. The study has adopted
seven model fit indices to predict model fitness. Graphics and colors, size and shape of the
packaging, product information and packaging material towards consumer buying behavior. As
the p value is 0.000 which is less than 0.05, thus model is fit for estimation. CMIN/Df value is
below 5 which is also acceptable. RMSEA would have the value that falls within the range of
0.05 to 0.08, which is laying in the between the range. However, for absolute fit, GFI should be
greater than 0.9. As, in this model, this requirements is not fulfilled; thus, this model is not
absolute fit. For CFI, it is not acceptable as well. But GFI and AGFI lies above 0.7 level it’s also
acceptable in some cases of model fit.

Estimate S.E C.R P Nature Response

ConsumerBB<---Graphiccol .199 .039 5.122 *** Positive Accepted
ConsumerBB<---ProductInfo -.045 .068 -.664 .507 Negative Rejected
ConsumerBB<---PackageMaterial 8.389 7.239 1.159 .246 Positive Rejected
ConsumerBB<---SizeShape .276 .055 4.987 *** Positive Accepted
Table 3.8. Regression Weights (Hypothesis Testing)

First, there is an impact of graphics and colors of the packaging on consumer buying behavior. (β
= 0.37, p < .001), therefore H1 is accepted.
Second, there is an impact of size and shape of the packaging on consumer buying behavior (β =
0.38, p < .001), therefore H2 is accepted.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3381882

Third, there is an impact of product information written on packaging a product on consumer
buying behavior (β = -0.04, p < .001), therefore H3 is rejected.
Fourth, there is an impact of packaging material of food items on consumer buying behavior (β =
0.85, p < .001), therefore H4 is rejected.

4. Discussions
Common purpose of this study was to find out the effect of packaging features on consumer’s
buying behavior of packaged food items in Karachi. The results obtained from this study
observed that highest critical ratio value is achieved by packaging graphics and colors i.e. 5.122
and after that packaging size and shape stands out at second then packaging material and then
comes product information with critical ratio values 4.987, 1.159 and -0.664 respectively. The
probability of getting a critical ratio as large as 5.122 in absolute value is less than 0.001. In
other words, the regression weight for packaging size and shape in the prediction of buying
behavior is significantly different from zero at the 0.001 level. The probability of getting a
critical ratio for packaging size and shape as large as 4.987 in absolute value is less than 0.001.
The probability of getting a critical ratio for packaging material as low as 1.159 in absolute value
is greater than 0.001. The probability of getting a critical ratio for product information as low and
in negative as -0.664 in absolute value is greater than 0.001 so it may state as the hypothesis for
packaging graphics & colors & packaging size and shape are accepted while hypothesis for
packaging material and product information are rejected.
Silayoi and Speece (2002) concluded that packaging attracts consumers and influences
consumer’s first buying purchase. As we have noticed that packaging graphics and colors &
packaging size and influence the purchase decision of consumers. Consumer first attracted by
colors and graphics then by size and shape of the packaging. Since the literacy level increasing in
Karachi and people are getting more and more aware about the products and packaging features.
People in Karachi are becoming more and more health conscious and are worrying about what
package foods they are taken and does this packaging of food meet the standard of packaging.
The finding showed that graphics and colors of the packaging has an impact on consumer buying
behavior of packaged foods. The right choice of colors and distinct graphics of packaging can
hold consumer attention and influencing their purchase decision. The results further supported
Clenment (2007) and Gofman (2010) that distinct graphics and contrast of packaging can
influence consumers’ visual attention. The key factor is the right choice of color in creating an
impression needed to impact brand and reaction of a product. Both studies supports the result of
packaging graphics and colors. As graphics and colors are variables in a consumer’s decision
process.
The result also showed that packaging size and shape also play a vital role in influencing the
consumer purchase decision. Consumer’s attracted by size and shape of the packaged food
product. Sohier’s (2009), Schoormans and Robben (1997), and Siyalo and Speece’s (2004)
concluded that package shape increases the emotions, attitude and buying behavior bringing an
advantage with competitors. More the shape of product innovative and different from others,
more attention towards product created. The package shapes can make product more attractive to
consumer. This showed that manufacturers should consider packaging size and shape an
important element while designing packaging of food products.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3381882

The result also showed that the consumers has no effect or has very low involvement towards
packaging material and product information these result are supported by Kotler (1996)
emphasizing consumer do not find so much information about low involvement products, they
just evaluate the characteristics of product and make a decision to buy. Furthermore, (Speece and
Nair, 2000) argued that consumers consider only two or three product features when making a
decision to buy a low involvement product

Overall results showed that consumer buying behavior can be influence by packaging features.
Most consumers make their purchase decision on floor of the store hence as in study it is proved
that consumers do not look for the packaging material and product information, they are attracted
by packaging graphics and colors and packaging size and shape of the product so the
manufacturers must ensure that their products must be unique and attractive and sensitive to the
consumers in order to get competitive advantage over their competitors..
Results from this research can be useful for branded segments that are out there in the market, it
can be vital from one of the perspective of 7P’s of marketing which is packaging. If they
consider packaging graphics and colors and packaging size and shape an important factor when
designing and formulation of packaging that may induce a stimuli in consumer’s minds that
could possibly result in making purchase at point of sale. Since it is consider as a loss if
consumer failed to put your product in the basket due to lack of communication from a producer,
communication is very essential tool in the marketing, because if product itself fails to
communicate with the shopper at shelf than there are few matters to look into, and packaging is
one of them.

5. Conclusion
Packaging features like packaging graphics and colors, packaging size and shape, product
information and packaging material impacts the consumer buying behavior. From the results of
this study, packaging features have shown their importance in product features and quality in a
manner that is competitive. Hence manufacturing companies cannot rule out the importance of
packaging as marketing tool. It enhances product awareness visibility and attractiveness. The
study also concluded that mostly consumer make their buying decisions quickly when they find
the product attractive and unique.
So that the Packaging decisions should be made without assumption by considering the
consumers choice first. This study is beneficial for the manufacturers for making new strategies
and in development of product packaging. Packaging works as a vehicle for communication and
branding between manufacturers and consumers.
The gaps that were identified, from the previous researches were covered in terms of features and
consumer buying behavior and specially kinking all the variables to marketing and
advertisements and packaging. This paper tends to bring all the factors relating to packaging
features in one place and trying to give weightage to each factor of its own. The product
packaging form the end of the ‘the promotion chain’ and is close in time to the actual purchase
and therefore, plays an important role in predicting consumer outcomes. Packaging also delivers
brand identification and label information like usage instructions, contents and list of ingredients

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3381882

or raw materials, warnings for usage and directives for care of product. Finally, it has also been
concluded that the packaging is one of the most important and powerful factor, which influences
consumers’ impulse buying.
This research has many of the limitations which includes limited time to complete the study,
limited targeted audience, limited areas of Karachi and etc. Therefore, future research can be
conducted on the relevant topic by opting other areas of Pakistan, choosing packaging other than
food items. This could also be tested in some other settings as the survey was limited to
packaged food products of manufacturing companies of Pakistan especially consumers of
Karachi as conducted through population of Karachi.
This research provides the central core of packaging features influencing consumer’s purchasing
decision so, further studies should be conducted on each feature independently. These results are
highly be applied a packaged products. Further studies can make the path of extension towards
types of products identifying different features and their impact of consumer buying behavior.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3381882

References

Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2007). Data Analysis Manual for the Social Sciences:

Ankara: PegemA. Publishing. Byrne, Z. S., & Cropanzano, R. (2001). The history of
organizational justice: The founders speak. Justice in the workplace: From theory to practice,
2, 3-26.
Nunnally, J. (1978). Psychometric methods: New York: McGraw-Hill
Terre Blanche, M., & Durrheim, K. (1999). Social constructionist methods. Research in
practice: Applied methods for the social sciences, 147-172.
J Betty(2018), Packaging attributes and consumer buying behavior of packaged foods,
Kenyatta University, Kenya.
9. Autonoma Kotler, P., Ang, S.H., Leong, S.M., Tan, C.T., 1996, Marketing Management:
An Asian Perspective, Prentice-Hall, Singapore.
K Rita (2009), impact of package elements on consumer purchase, Kauno technologijos
universities, Lietuva, ekonomika is vadyba.
L (2006), the power Alice of packaging, united states of America, pp 186-216
L Renaud(2007), The influence of label on wine consumption : its effects on young
consumers’ perception of authenticity and purchasing behavior, Bologna, Italy.
Bytyqi Hysen*, Vegara Mensur (2008) , analysis of consumer behavior in regard to dairy
products in Kosovo, Agric. Res., 2008, 46(3)
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.
Liang Lu (2008) as a Packaging strategic tool University of Halmstad school of Business
and Engineering.
Underwood, R. L. (2003). The communicative power of product packaging: creating brand
identity via lived and mediated experience. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice,
Winter, 62-76.
Pires Gon ̧calves, Ricardo (2008), product characteristics and quality perception, university at
de Barcelona.
Kuvykaite, R. (2001). Gaminio marketingas. Kaunas: Technologija. Madden, T. J., Hewett,
K., & Roth, M. S. (2000). Managing images in different cultures: A cross-national study of
color meanings and preferences. Journal of International Marketing, 8(4), 90-1.
Noorani, H.S., & Setty, K. (2007). “Three Steps for Successful implementation of Sales
Portals in CPG
companies”. International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management, Vol. 35, 746-749.
Rundh, B. (2005). The Multi-faceted dimension of packaging: marketing logistic or
marketing tool? British Food Journal, 107(9), 670-84.
Baik, S., (2011). “Package design management in SMEs”, .Diversity and Management, pp:
1-6.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3381882

Behzad,M.,(2014), “the art of packaging: An investigation into the role of color in packaging,
marketing and branding”, International journal of organizational leadership pp. 92-102
Nawaz, A.,billo,M. and Lakhan, A.A. (2012). Effect of product packaging in consumer
buying decision, Journal of Business Strategies, Vol.6, 2,pp 1-10, ISSN: 1993-5765.
Silayoi, P. , & Speece, M. (2004), “Packaging and purchase decisions: an exploratory study
on the impact of involvement level and time pressure”, British Food Journal. Vol.106(8),607-
628.
Ares,G., Gimenez,A., Bruzzone, F., Antunez, L., Sapolinski, A., Vidal, L.,& Maiche, A.
(2012). Attentional capture and understanding of nutrition labeling: A study based on
response times. International Journal of Food Sciences and Nutrition, 63,679-688
Ares,G., & Deliza, R. (2010). Studying the influence of package shape and color on
consumer expectations of milk desserts using word associated and conjoint analysis. Food
Quality and preference, 21(6), 930-937
Egan, J. (2007). Marketing Communications. London: Cengage Learning
Engel, J.F,. Blackwell,. & Miniard, P.W. (1986). Consumer Behavior (5th ed.). Dryden Press
Hollywood, L. W. (2013). Thinking outside the carton: attitudes towards milk packaging.
British Food Journal, 115 (6), 899-912
Jobber, D. (1995). Principles and Practice of Marketing. McGraw-Hill: Berkshire. Johns, N.
& Pine, R. (2002) Consumer behavior in the food service industry: a review. International
Journal of Hospitality Management, 21, 119-134.
Kotler, P., Wong, V., Saunders, J. and Armstrong, G. (2005). Principles of Marketing. 4th ed.
Pearson.
Kuvykaite., R., Dovliene, A., & Navickiene, L, (2009). Impact of package elements on
consumer’s purchase decision. Economics & Management 14. 441-446.
Marshall, D., Stuart, M., & Bell, R. (2006). Examining the relationship between product
package color and product selection I pre-schoolers. Food Quality and Prefernce, 17(7-8),
615-621.
Nawaz, A. and Asad, L. 2012. Effect of product packaging in Consumer Buying decision.
Journal of Business strategies, 6(2): 1-10.
Prathiraja, P.H.K. and Ariyawardana, A. (2003) “impact of Nutritional Labeling on
Consumer Buying Behavior”, Srilankan Journal of Agricultural Economics, Vol.5(1), pp.35-
46.
Rundh, B. (2009). Packaging design: creating competitive advantage with product packaging,
British Food Journal 111, No. 9, 988-1002.
Schiffman, L., Hansen H. and Kanuk L. (2007). Consumer Behavior: A European Outlook.
London: Pearson Education
Silayoi, P. & Seece, M. (2007) The importance of packaging attributes: a conjoint analysis
approach. European Journal of Marketing, 41, 1495-1517.
Silayoi, P. and M. Speece (2004). Packaging and Purchase Decisions. British food journal
106(8); 607-608

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3381882

 Smith. P.R., & Taylor, J. (2004). Marketing communication: An Integrated Approach. Kogan
Page, uk
Spink, J., Singh, J., & Singh, S.P. (2011). Review of package warning labels and their effect
on consumer behavior with insight to future anticounterfeit strategy of label and
communication systems. Packaging Technology and Science, 24, 469-484.
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,
62-75.

View publication stats Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3381882