FYP Example PDF

IN THE EYE OF THE CONSUMERS:
INFLUENCE OF LABELS AND

PACKAGES ON THE CONSUMERS
PERCEPTION TOWARDS HEALTHY
LABELLED FOOD
CHUN JIN WEE
BACHELOR OF BUSINESS
ADMINISTRATION (HONS)
FACULTY OF BUSINESS
MULTIMEDIA UNIVERSITY
SEPTEMBER 2015
IN THE EYE OF THE CONSUMERS:

INFLUENCE OF LABELS AND
PACKAGES ON THE CONSUMERS
PERCEPTION TOWARDS HEALTHY
LABELLED FOOD
By
CHUN JIN WEE
A research project submitted in partial

fulfillment of the requirements for the degree
of
BACHELOR OF BUSINESS
ADMINISTRATION (HONS) B.B.A. (Hons)
(MARKETING MANAGEMENT)
FACULTY OF BUSINESS
MULTIMEDIA UNIVERSITY
FEBRUARY 2016
CHUN JIN WEE INFLUENCE ON LABELS AND PACKAGES
BBA FEB 2016
2016 Universiti Telekom Sdn. Bhd. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
Copyright of this report belongs to Universiti Telekom Sdn. Bhd. as

qualified by Regulation 7.2 (c) of the Multimedia University Intellectual
Property and Commercialization Policy. No part of this publication may be
reproduced, stored in or introduced into a retrieval system, or transmitted in
any form or by any means (electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording,
or otherwise), or for any purpose, without the express written permission of
Universiti Telekom Sdn. Bhd. Due acknowledgement shall always be made
of the use of any material in, or derived from, this report.
ii
DECLARATION
I hereby declare that the work have been done by myself and no portion of the work
contained in this research project report has been submitted in support of any application
for any other degree or qualification of this or any other university or institute of
learning.
I hereby declares that pursuant to the provisions of the Copyright Act 1987 (the Act) that
I shall not during my tenure at the University or thereafter engage in any unauthorized
act of copying or reproducing or attempt to copy / reproduce or cause to copy /
reproduce or permit the copying / reproducing or the sharing and / or downloading of
any copyrighted material or an attempt to do so whether by use of the Universitys
facilities or outside networks / facilities whether in hard copy or soft copy format, of any
material protected under the provisions of sections 3 and 7 of the Act whether for
payment or otherwise save as specifically provided for therein. This shall include but not
be limited to any lecture notes, course packs, thesis, text books, exam questions, any
works of authorship fixed in any tangible medium of expression whether provided by the
University or otherwise.
I hereby further declare that in the event of any infringement of the provisions of the Act
whether knowingly or unknowingly the University shall not be liable for the same in any
manner whatsoever and undertake to indemnify and keep indemnified the University
against all such claims and actions.
______________________
CHUN JIN WEE
1131121562
iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to thank my supervisor, Miss Haniza Binti Hashim for her time,
patience, motivation and enthusiasm in completion of the study. Her support and
guidance helped me in all the time of research and writing of this thesis.
I am thankful to my friend, Tareef Alsatti for the support, patience and
encouragement during the course of this thesis. Your friendship makes my life a
wonderful experience. I would also like to show my gratitude to Frank Teo Kok Chuan
for sharing your knowledge.
Finally I take this opportunity to express the gratitude from my deep heart to my
beloved family for their psychological support and spiritually.
Thank you, God, for always being there for me.
iv
This thesis is dedicated to my parents.

For their endless love, support and encouragement
ABSTRACT
For the past few years, obesity and overweight rates has been increasing among
children and teens. Obesity can be defined as abnormal or excessive fat accumulation
that may impair health. It is generally caused by eating too much fats and sugars and not
doing any exercise or physical activity. Thus many food companies started to offer
healthier food options for the interested consumers. As consumers, each has vast number
of attitude and perception toward products labels and packages to evaluate the foods
whether it is healthy or not. Current literature examining customers perception of
healthy food has been developed in Jusco, Malacca. Hence, this research is to
understand consumers perception of healthy food.
Conceptual framework was proposed for analyzing consumers perception
toward healthy food. This study supported the view of consumers perception toward
healthy food products will influence on the food label and packages. Data was collected
in shopping mall and surrounding area in the district Jusco, Malacca. A total 200 grocery
shoppers was completed the questionnaires were distributed. Five Likert scale was used
to rate food labels and packages and the factors influencing consumers perception. It
also could observe the perception of healthy food products according to the respondents
age, gender and income level.
The results of the study revealed the importance of labeling and packaging
design in consumer perception, it was found out that food label and packages elements
such as Nutrition Claims, Nutrition Information, color and shape play a key role in
decision making and grab consumers attention. Moreover, these results are interesting
for marketers, concerning the fact that packages can be used to communicate
healthfulness.
vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS
COPYRIGHT .................................................................................................................. ii
DECLARATION ............................................................................................................ iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................................iv
DEDICATION .................................................................................................................. v
ABSTRACT .....................................................................................................................vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS .............................................................................................. vii
LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................... x
LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................xi
Chapter 1 Introduction .................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 1
1.2 Background of the Research and Research Question .................................................. 2
1.3 Problem Statement ....................................................................................................... 4
1.4 Research Question ........................................................................................................ 5
1.5 Research Objectives ..................................................................................................... 5
1.6 Significance and Justifications for the Study ............................................................... 6
1.7 Research Scope ............................................................................................................ 6
1.8 Definition of the Key Terms ........................................................................................ 7
1.9 Organization of the Research ....................................................................................... 8
Chapter 2 Literature Review .......................................................................................... 9
2.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 9
2.2 The Theory ................................................................................................................... 9
2.3 Healthy Food .............................................................................................................. 11
2.4 Consumer Perception ................................................................................................. 12
2.5 Labelling and Packaging ............................................................................................ 13
2.5.1 Nutrition Claims .................................................................................................. 14
vii
2.5.2 Nutrition Information .......................................................................................... 15

2.5.3 Colour.................................................................................................................. 16
2.5.4 Shape ................................................................................................................... 18
2.6 Previous Studies ......................................................................................................... 19
2.7 Summary .................................................................................................................... 24
Chapter 3 Methodology ................................................................................................. 25
3.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................ 25
3.2 Research Model .......................................................................................................... 25
3.3 Sampling Size ............................................................................................................ 26
3.3.1 Sample Size ......................................................................................................... 27
3.3.2 Target Respondents ............................................................................................. 29
3.3.3 Sampling Method ................................................................................................ 29
3.4 Sources of Data .......................................................................................................... 30
3.4.1 Primary Data ....................................................................................................... 30
3.4.2 Secondary Data ................................................................................................... 30
3.5 Operationalization of the Variables ........................................................................... 30
3.6 Data Collection........................................................................................................... 33
3.6.1 Questionnaires ..................................................................................................... 33
3.7 Pilot Testing ............................................................................................................... 34
3.8 Data Analysis ............................................................................................................. 34
3.8.1 Validity and Reliability ....................................................................................... 35
3.8.1.1 Validity......................................................................................................... 35
3.8.1.2 Reliability ..................................................................................................... 35
3.8.2 Correlation Analysis ........................................................................................... 36
3.8.3 Regression Analysis ............................................................................................ 36
3.9 Summary chapter ....................................................................................................... 36
Chapter 4 Research Findings and Discussion ............................................................. 37
4.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................ 37
4.2 Descriptive Analyses .................................................................................................. 37
4.2.1 Demographic Profile of Respondents ................................................................. 38
4.2.2 Summary of Demographic Characteristics ......................................................... 41
viii
4.3 Mean Analysis ............................................................................................................ 44

4.4 Pearsons Correlation Analysis .................................................................................. 44
4.5 Reliability Analysis .................................................................................................... 46
4.6 Multiple Linear Regression Analysis ......................................................................... 47
4.7 Summary .................................................................................................................... 53
Chapter 5 Conclusion and Recommendation .............................................................. 54
5.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................ 54
5.2 Research Findings and Discussion ............................................................................. 54
5.3 Managerial Implications............................................................................................. 55
5.4 Discussion of Research Objectives and Hypotheses .................................................. 56
5.4.3 Colour of the packages ........................................................................................ 58
5.4.4 Shape of the packages ......................................................................................... 59
5.5 Limitation of the Study .............................................................................................. 60
5.6 Recommendation for Future Research ....................................................................... 60
5.7 Conclusions ................................................................................................................ 61
Appendices ...................................................................................................................... 62
References ....................................................................................................................... 67
ix
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1.1
Definition of key terms
Table 2.1
Conjoint analysis result (part-worth utilities and relative 22

importance of each attribute) for expected liking and
willingness to purchase scores.
Table 3.1
Operationalization
31
Table 4.1:
Summary of Demographic Characteristics
42
Table 4.2:
Summary of Important Attributes in Daily Life
43
Table 4.3:
Mean and standard deviation for the labels and packages of
44
healthy food
Table 4.4:
Correlation between packaging design and consumers
44
perception
Table 4.5:
Rule of thumbs of correlation analysis
45
Table 4.6:
Summary of Reliability Analysis Result
46
Table 4.7:
Multiple Linear Regressions
47
Table 4.8:
AVONA Test
48
Table 4.9:
Coefficients
48
Table 4.10:
Summary of Hypothesis Testing Results
50
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1.1
Nutrition Claims and Nutrition Information
Figure 1.2
Skippy Peanut Butter Nutrition Information
Figure 2.1
Theory of Consumer Decision Process (CDP)
10
Figure 2.2
Theory of Total Food Quality Model (TFQM)
11
Figure 2.3
Nature Valley snack bar
15
Figure 2.4
Understand and use the Nutrition Information
16
Figure 2.5
Different color of packaging influence customers
17
perception
Figure 2.6
Healthy biscuit shaped package based on consumers
19
perception
Figure 2.7
Interactions between outcome dimension, claim strength,
20
and claim concreteness on perceived healthfulness, sensory

expectation, and purchase intention.
Figure 2.8
Sample of experimental stimuli
21
Figure 3.1
Proposed Research Framework
26
Figure 3.2
Central and non-central distributions
28
Figure 3.3
X-Y plot for a range of value
28
Figure 3.4
Five-point Likert scale
35
Figure 4.1:
Gender of respondents
38
Figure 4.2:
Ages of respondents
38
Figure 4.3:
Marital Status of Respondents
39
Figure 4.4:
Monthly Family Income
39
Figure 4.5:
Different labels and packages of healthy food
40
Figure 4.6:
Physical Activity
40
Figure 4.7:
Overall Health Status
41
Figure 4.8:
Histogram
50
Figure 4.9:
Normal P-P Plot Regression Standardized Residual
51
Figure 4.10:
Scatterplot
52
xi
xii
2016 Universiti Telekom Sdn. Bhd. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
Copyright of this report belongs to Universiti Telekom Sdn. Bhd. as

qualified by Regulation 7.2 (c) of the Multimedia University Intellectual
Property and Commercialization Policy. No part of this publication may be
reproduced, stored in or introduced into a retrieval system, or transmitted in
any form or by any means (electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording,
or otherwise), or for any purpose, without the express written permission of
Universiti Telekom Sdn. Bhd. Due acknowledgement shall always be made
of the use of any material in, or derived from, this report.
DECLARATION
I hereby declare that the work have been done by myself and no portion of the work
contained in this research project report has been submitted in support of any application
for any other degree or qualification of this or any other university or institute of
learning.
I hereby declares that pursuant to the provisions of the Copyright Act 1987 (the Act) that
I shall not during my tenure at the University or thereafter engage in any unauthorized
act of copying or reproducing or attempt to copy / reproduce or cause to copy /
reproduce or permit the copying / reproducing or the sharing and / or downloading of
any copyrighted material or an attempt to do so whether by use of the Universitys
facilities or outside networks / facilities whether in hard copy or soft copy format, of any
material protected under the provisions of sections 3 and 7 of the Act whether for
payment or otherwise save as specifically provided for therein. This shall include but not
be limited to any lecture notes, course packs, thesis, text books, exam questions, any
works of authorship fixed in any tangible medium of expression whether provided by the
University or otherwise.
I hereby further declare that in the event of any infringement of the provisions of the Act
whether knowingly or unknowingly the University shall not be liable for the same in any
manner whatsoever and undertake to indemnify and keep indemnified the University
against all such claims and actions.
______________________
CHUN JIN WEE
1131121562
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to thank my supervisor, Miss Haniza Binti Hashim for her time,
patience, motivation and enthusiasm in completion of the study. Her support and
guidance helped me in all the time of research and writing of this thesis.
I am thankful to my friend, Tareef Alsatti for the support, patience and
encouragement during the course of this thesis. Your friendship makes my life a
wonderful experience. I would also like to show my gratitude to Frank Teo Kok Chuan
for sharing your knowledge.
Finally I take this opportunity to express the gratitude from my deep heart to my
beloved family for their psychological support and spiritually.
Thank you, God, for always being there for me.
This thesis is dedicated to my parents.

For their endless love, support and encouragement
ABSTRACT
For the past few years, obesity and overweight rates has been increasing among
children and teens. Obesity can be defined as abnormal or excessive fat accumulation
that may impair health. It is generally caused by eating too much fats and sugars and not
doing any exercise or physical activity. Thus many food companies started to offer
healthier food options for the interested consumers. As consumers, each has vast number
of attitude and perception toward products labels and packages to evaluate the foods
whether it is healthy or not. Current literature examining customers perception of
healthy food has been developed in Jusco, Malacca. Hence, this research is to
understand consumers perception of healthy food.
Conceptual framework was proposed for analysing consumers perception
toward healthy food. This study supported the view of consumers perception toward
healthy food products will influence on the food label and packages. Data was collected
in shopping mall and surrounding area in the district Jusco, Malacca. A total 200 grocery
shoppers was completed the questionnaires were distributed. Five Likert scale was used
to rate food labels and packages and the factors influencing consumers perception. It
also could observe the perception of healthy food products according to the respondents
age, gender and income level.
The results of the study revealed the importance of labelling and packaging
design in consumer perception, it was found out that food label and packages elements
such as Nutrition Claims, Nutrition Information, colour and shape play a key role in
decision making and grab consumers attention. Moreover, these results are interesting
for marketers, concerning the fact that packages can be used to communicate
healthfulness.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
COPYRIGHT .................................................................................................................. ii
DECLARATION ............................................................................................................ iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................................iv
DEDICATION .................................................................................................................. v
ABSTRACT .....................................................................................................................vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS .............................................................................................. vii
LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................... x
LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................xi
Chapter 1 Introduction .................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 1
1.2 Background of the Research and Research Question .................................................. 2
1.3 Problem Statement ....................................................................................................... 4
1.4 Research Question ........................................................................................................ 5
1.5 Research Objectives ..................................................................................................... 5
1.6 Significance and Justifications for the Study ............................................................... 6
1.7 Research Scope ............................................................................................................ 6
1.8 Definition of the Key Terms ........................................................................................ 7
1.9 Organization of the Research ....................................................................................... 8
Chapter 2 Literature Review .......................................................................................... 9
2.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 9
2.2 The Theory ................................................................................................................... 9
2.3 Healthy Food .............................................................................................................. 11
2.4 Consumer Perception ................................................................................................. 12
2.5 Labelling and Packaging ............................................................................................ 13
2.5.3 Colour.................................................................................................................. 16
2.5.4 Shape ................................................................................................................... 18
2.6 Previous Studies ......................................................................................................... 19

2.7 Summary .................................................................................................................... 24
Chapter 3 Methodology ................................................................................................. 25
3.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................ 25
3.2 Research Model .......................................................................................................... 25
3.3 Sampling Size ............................................................................................................ 26
3.3.1 Sample Size ......................................................................................................... 27
3.3.2 Target Respondents ............................................................................................. 29
3.3.3 Sampling Method ................................................................................................ 29
3.4 Sources of Data .......................................................................................................... 30
3.4.1 Primary Data ....................................................................................................... 30
3.4.2 Secondary Data ................................................................................................... 30
3.5 Operationalization of the Variables ........................................................................... 30
3.6 Data Collection........................................................................................................... 33
3.6.1 Questionnaires ..................................................................................................... 33
3.7 Pilot Testing ............................................................................................................... 34
3.8 Data Analysis ............................................................................................................. 34
3.8.1 Validity and Reliability ....................................................................................... 35
3.8.1.1 Validity......................................................................................................... 35
3.8.1.2 Reliability ..................................................................................................... 35
3.8.2 Correlation Analysis ........................................................................................... 36
3.8.3 Regression Analysis ............................................................................................ 36
3.9 Summary chapter ....................................................................................................... 36
Chapter 4 Research Findings and Discussion ............................................................. 37
4.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................ 37
4.2 Descriptive Analyses .................................................................................................. 37
4.2.1 Demographic Profile of Respondents ................................................................. 38
4.2.2 Summary of Demographic Characteristics ......................................................... 41
4.3 Mean Analysis ............................................................................................................ 44
4.4 Pearsons Correlation Analysis .................................................................................. 44
4.5 Reliability Analysis .................................................................................................... 46
4.6 Multiple Linear Regression Analysis ......................................................................... 47
4.7 Cross Tabulation ........................................................................................................ 53
4.8 Summary .................................................................................................................... 53

Chapter 5 Conclusion and Recommendation .............................................................. 54
5.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................ 54
5.2 Research Findings and Discussion ............................................................................. 54
5.3 Managerial Implications............................................................................................. 55
5.4 Discussion of Research Objectives and Hypotheses .................................................. 56
5.4.3 Colour of the packages ........................................................................................ 58
5.4.4 Shape of the packages ......................................................................................... 59
5.5 Limitation of the Study .............................................................................................. 60
5.6 Recommendation for Future Research ....................................................................... 60
5.7 Conclusions ................................................................................................................ 61
Appendices ...................................................................................................................... 62
References ....................................................................................................................... 73
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1.1
Definition of key terms
Table 2.1
Conjoint analysis result (part-worth utilities and relative 22

importance of each attribute) for expected liking and
willingness to purchase scores.
Table 3.1
Operationalization
31
Table 4.1:
Summary of Demographic Characteristics
42
Table 4.2:
Summary of Important Attributes in Daily Life
43
Table 4.3:
Mean and standard deviation for the labels and packages of
44
healthy food
Table 4.4:
Correlation between packaging design and consumers
44
perception
Table 4.5:
Rule of thumbs of correlation analysis
45
Table 4.6:
Summary of Reliability Analysis Result
46
Table 4.7:
Multiple Linear Regressions
47
Table 4.8:
AVONA Test
48
Table 4.9:
Coefficients
48
Table 4.10:
Summary of Hypothesis Testing Results
50
Table 4.11:
Cross Tabulation of different label and packages of healthy 53

food and Gender
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1.1
Nutrition Claims and Nutrition Information
Figure 1.2
Skippy Peanut Butter Nutrition Information
Figure 2.1
Theory of Consumer Decision Process (CDP)
10
Figure 2.2
Theory of Total Food Quality Model (TFQM)
11
Figure 2.3
Nature Valley snack bar
15
Figure 2.4
Understand and use the Nutrition Information
16
Figure 2.5
Different colour of packaging influence customers
17
perception
Figure 2.6
Healthy biscuit shaped package based on consumers
19
perception
Figure 2.7
Interactions between outcome dimension, claim strength,
20
and claim concreteness on perceived healthfulness, sensory

expectation, and purchase intention.
Figure 2.8
Sample of experimental stimuli
21
Figure 3.1
Proposed Research Framework
26
Figure 3.2
Central and non-central distributions
28
Figure 3.3
X-Y plot for a range of value
28
Figure 3.4
Five-point Likert scale
35
Figure 4.1:
Gender of respondents
38
Figure 4.2:
Ages of respondents
38
Figure 4.3:
Marital Status of Respondents
39
Figure 4.4:
39
Figure 4.5:
40
Figure 4.6:
Physical Activity
40
Figure 4.7:
41
Figure 4.8:
Histogram
50
Figure 4.9:
Normal P-P Plot Regression Standardized Residual
51
Figure 4.10:
Scatterplot
52
10
Chapter 1 Introduction
1.1 Introduction
Healthy food can be perceived or identified by looking at the Nutrition Claims or
the Nutrition Information found on both the front and back of food packages which can
aid consumers in their food purchasing choices as seen in Figure 1.1 below. Nutrition
Claims is placed on the front of the package and normally presented in graphical figures
or short healthy claim texts, whereas the Nutrition Information is normally placed on the
back of the package in the form of a table, and it shows more detailed information.
Several researches have indicated that the front package nutrition claims tends to be well
received by consumers (Grunert, Wills, & Fernndez-Celemn, 2010). Besides that,
Nutrition Claims is normally more easily understood than the Nutrition Information
(Plotnik et al., 2014). On the other hand, Nutrition Information on the back of the
packages are sophisticated and are not easily understood by consumers because some
consumer behaviour tends to be more like pick and go rather than reading the
information and deciding upon it (Miller & Cassady, 2015). However, when Nutrition
Claims do not measure up to Nutrition Information, consumer may be misled to make ill
informed purchases.
Figure 1.1: Nutrition Claims (left) and Nutrition Information (right)
Adapted From: Anjali. Demystifying Health Food Labels. 2014, and Ellen Steinberg.
Reading Food Labels. 2004
11
Many consumers realized that not all foods are healthy, thus they begun to look
for cues to help them consider whether a food product is good for them or not (R. L.
Underwood, Klein, & Burke, 2001). That is why some consumers who look for healthy
food are willing to pay more for healthy or nutritive products, since they can increase
their utility level and reduce their health risks (Naujokas et al., 2013). To increase the
awareness of consumers on a certain food product, food industry will produce food
labelled with buzzwords such as organic, all natural, whole grain and no-added sugar
and to make it perceived as a healthier option. And with the aid of packaging shapes,
designs and colours, food industry can achieve a higher product demand and better
consumer satisfaction.
Food choices and utilization is a sophisticated phenomenon, influenced by
visible and non-visible food characteristics and also by the product labelling which has a
major effect on the consumer responses, influencing the expectations and perceptions of
the product (Piqueras-Fiszman, Alcaide, Roura, & Spence, 2012). Nutrition labelling
and packaging can influence customers perception when making a purchasing decision,
by influencing its perceived quality expectation. Nutrition labelling if read properly by
consumers can lead toward healthier choices by understanding the information about the
detail nutrient content of a food (Cowburn & Stockley, 2005).
1.2 Background of the Research and Research Question
A balanced diet is related to the daily eating habit and peoples food choices.
Because of some dieters are lazy to do physical activities and do not like to move a lot,
they rather seek out foods labelled as healthy to make themselves feel less guilty when
consuming them. That is why food manufacturers noticed the consumer interest in
healthy food and increased their healthy food labelling in the recent years (Proper &
Mechelen, 2007). Most of the consumers do not know how to read the context of
Nutrition Information and naturally will interpret the healthy food by only looking at the
Nutrition Claims which is placed on the front of the packages. While some of them do
not want to take some time to read the label before they purchase (Tarabella & Voinea,
2013). Therefore, consumers normally quickly skim for information or messages on the
12
packaging that says healthy or fitness or pick according to the packaging colour and
shape to interpret the food product whether it is healthy or unhealthy.
The complex nutritional information as seen in Figure 1.2 below is not easily
understood by many consumers. They prefer an easy way to get this information in order
to make healthier choices due to the rapid evaluation of the nutritional characteristics
(Tarabella & Voinea, 2013). Consumer might think that Nutrition Claims such as low
fat and no added sugar by itself is already a better choice for the body health, but
packaging can be extremely misleading. For example, Super Fruit Nutrition Sunsweet
claims that it contains no added sugar, careless consumer may conclude that this nutri
snack is healthy from the observed nutrition claims, but the Nutrition Information shows
that its sugars content is 38g. However, between Nutrition Claims and Nutrition
Information it is shown to be confusing for some consumers (Ellis et al., 2010). Because
the Nutrition Information placed on the back of packages can be ambiguously presented
in fine prints that make reading difficult by consumers (Watson et al., 2012)
Figure 1.2: Skippy Peanut Butter Nutrition Information
Adapted From: Linnelle. Watch those Food Labels, for your Healths Sake. 2013
According to Murray and Delahunty (2000) consumer behaviour is influenced by

the products packaging attributes, whilst products' sensory attributes confirm liking and
13
may repeat purchases. In order to attract the attention of consumers, the appropriate way
to communicate with consumers is a product design packaging. Products visual
appearance communicates with consumer through the colour and shape (Ruumpol,
2014). Consumers unconsciously observe important cues about the product from the
package information and the packages design, which in turn raise sensory expectations
of the product (Moskowitz, Ooi, & Pedersen, 2012). This means that consumer would
imagine how the product would taste and decide to like it or not just by looking at the
packages. In addition, consumer also might perceive the healthiness of the food product
by its colour and shape when conveying nutrition information.
1.3 Problem Statement
There are several studies that are done in the area of food packaging, and they
are either about the packaging attributes or the nutrition label influence on the
consumers perception. For example, Ares and Deliza studied consumer expectation on
milk desserts that is influenced by the shape and the colour of the package and related it
to food attribute design in 2014. Another article wrote by Arslanagic, Pestek and Kadic
studied the perception of healthy food packaging information and indicated the
significance of distinctive attributes of healthy food packaging information on
consumers perception. Concerning the previous researches, it can be seen that not a lot
of studies are about the influence of healthy food labelling on customer perception. Due
to this, it is necessary to do this research with more details as to identify which colour
and shape makes the food perceived to be healthy by looking on the appearance of the
package and also to enhance customers knowledge about Nutrition Claims and
Information on the packaging. Therefore, this study will examine the extents of the
product attributes in particular its Nutrition Claims, Nutrition Information, package
colour and package shape that influence the perceived health benefits of a product.
14
1.4 Research Question

The motivation behind this study is to identify the impact of food labelling and
packaging on customer perception towards healthy food product. The packaging design
attributes will be analysed for the consumers perception of healthy food. The specific
research questions address that this study will attempt to answer the followings:
1. Is there any relationship between Nutrition Claims on the front of the
packages and consumers perception of the health benefits of the food
product?
2. Is there any relationship between Nutrition Information on the back of the
packages and consumers perception of the health benefits of the food
product?
3. Is there any relationship between the colour of the packages and consumers
perception of the health benefits of the food product?
4. Is there any relationship between the shape of the packages and consumers
perception of the health benefits of the food product?
1.5 Research Objectives
This study aims to evaluate several packaging on customer perception of food
product health benefits, in order to understand which packaging design attributes are the
most important factors that influence consumers perception toward healthy food. The
objectives of this research are as follow:
1. To determine whether Nutrition Claims on the front of the packages influence
consumers perception.
2. To investigate whether the Nutrition Information on the back of the packages
influences consumers perception.
3. To understand consumers perception of food health benefits based on the colour
of the packages.
4. To understand consumers perception of food health benefits based on the shape
of the packages.
15
1.6 Significance and Justifications for the Study

Nutrition knowledge is quite important for every person, it provides support for
food labels usage and it helps consumers understand the information written on the
packages which will help them make an educated and informed choice. Consumers will
be able to correctly differentiate between healthy or unhealthy foods based on this
information. Furthermore, nutrition knowledge is a skill that can make consumers
capable to make consideration, memory, purchase decision and even easy to understand
the procedures more effectively (Caillies, Denhire, & Kintsch, 2002). Food
manufacturers may also benefit from this study by applying suitable modifications to
their Nutritional Claims and Information printed on their food products based on the
findings of this study, as some manufacturers tend to use complex nutrition information
that confuses the consumers and makes it harder for them to understand the nutritional
information provided. Besides, they can understand more about the consumers healthy
food perception and their satisfaction based on the colour and the shape of the food
product.
1.7 Research Scope
This proposed research is qualitative and quantitative in nature based on
observations, questionnaires and interviews with 200 grocery shoppers at Jusco,
Malacca. Employees and employers in the shopping mall are not included in the survey.
The qualitative method would provide an analysis of the consumers perception while
the quantitative would reveal the number and demographic of the people studied
accordingly.
16
1.8 Definition of the Key Terms

The definition of key terms are shown in Table 1.1.
Table1.1: Definition of key terms
Key Terms
Definition
Source
Healthy food
It is food that has health
Carels, Harper,& Konrad
giving benefits.
2006; Oakes & Slotterback,

2004
Nutrition Claims
A label that shows
Mathios & Ippolito, 1999
scientifically proven health

benefits related with
consuming the food.
Nutrition Information
Detailed information on
Miller & Cassady, 2015
the calories, serving size,

and amounts of several
vitamins, macronutrients,
and minerals (e.g., fats,
carbohydrate, calcium).
Packaging
Designing an informative,
The Package Appearance
attractive and eye catching
in Choice by Lawrence L,
container for the food
n.d.
product.
Consumer perception
The information perceived

and understood by
consumers and consisted of
awareness, impression and
own opinion about the
product.
17
Tarabella & Burchi, 2012
Nutrition knowledge
The knowledge about
Miller & Cassady, 2015
health, diet requirements

and foods which are rich
with healthy nutrient.
Colour influence
The influence of label
Schuldt, 2013
colours on the peoples

perception about the food
health benefits.
Food perception
Perception affected by the
Piqueras-Fiszman,
look of the food, our
Giboreau, & Spence, 2013
expectations about it, and

any contextual factors that
may be relevant.
1.9 Organization of the Research

This study has a total of five chapters, the research is about the food labelling and
packaging influence on consumers perception towards healthy food.
Chapter one
introduces the topic of the study consisting of background, research objectives,

significance and justification, and research scope. Chapter two reviews the influence of
labels and packaging on consumers perception toward health food. Chapter three is the
methodology which covers the conceptual framework and hypothesis, research design,
sampling data, pilot testing, collection of the data and the method used to analyse the
data. Chapter four discusses the results of the study. Chapter five discusses the
limitations and conclusion of the study.
18
Chapter 2 Literature Review

2.1 Introduction
Literature review on this chapter presents the healthy labelled food and the
customers perception where it will define the dependent variables and independent
variables. The literature review is conducted to further understand the term, definition,
and the characteristics of the research topics. It also seeks to review relevant literature of
theories associated with this theme. In addition, at the end of this chapter there will be an
evaluation and summary of the previous studies and a conclusion.
2.2 The Theory
The theory of Consumer Decision Process (CDP) model and the Theory of Total
Food Quality Model (TFQM) is a theory used to empathize the issues relating to healthy
food consumption and the consumer perception.
The CDP model was first proposed in 1968 by Engel, Kollatt and Blackwell. It
has been developed and modified to a more advanced and sophisticated model
comprising seven stages. Figure 2.1 below shows the model shaped by many factors and
categorized into two sectors: individual differences and environmental influences.
Consumer behaviour theory CDP model examined the interaction between
environmental and individual factors effect on consumers purchase behaviour and
eventually selecting the best possible choice. Individual factors include customer
resources, motivation, involvement, knowledge, attitude, personality, value and lifestyle.
Besides, nutrition knowledge is important for dietary choice for customer to make a
purchase decision. Knowledgeable customer can easily make evaluations, look less for
external sources of information and, therefore, it is more difficult to influence their
decision. (Milner & Rosenstreich, 2013; Kollat, Blackwell, & Engel, 1972).
19
Figure 2.1 Theory of Consumer Decision Process (CDP)
Source: Blackwell, Miniard and Engel, 2006

Figure 2.2 below shows the model named Total Food Quality Model (Blackwell,
Miniard, & Engel, 2006) where distinction between before and after purchase
evaluations was proposed by Grunert in 1997. Before the purchase consumers can form
their quality expectations based on several extrinsic and intrinsic cues. Extrinsic cues
can be observed by naked eyes and checked by customer directly such as food label and
its information. It will influence customers expectation about eating healthy food.
Intrinsic cues occur at the first sight of customers and sometimes appear to be irrational
for example a consumer uses the colour and size of the meat to measure its taste and
fatness (Blackwell et al., 2006). The expected quality divided into taste, health,
convenience and process characteristics. Total Food Quality Model integrates researches
on consumer satisfaction and dissatisfaction, and also on confirmation or
disconfirmation with before purchase quality expectations (Oliver & Westbrook, 1982).
20
Figure 2.2 Theory of Total Food Quality Model (TFQM)
Source: Grunert (1997)
2.3 Healthy Food

Food is a basic need for human being and also it plays an important role for
health (Ruumpol, 2014). Healthy food is referred to as natural food that is thought to
have health-giving qualities(Ruumpol, 2014). It does not contain micro-organisms,
chemicals or others that can harm human health. Healthy food preferences and dietary
habits are related to the development of obesity later in life (Guerra, de Lara, Malizia, &
Daz, 2009). As everyone knows that healthy food is also an organic food which is low
in fat or less sugar such as fruits, vegetables, yoghurt etc. Consumers choose to consume
healthy food for the sake of avoiding illnesses and for a good appearance. The
mentioning of healthy food is normally connected with claims and labels such as helps
maintain weight and helps maintain clear skin (Bassett, Chapman, & Beagan, 2008).
Besides that, different gender have distinctive observation toward health and wellbeing
(Budesa, Egnor, & Howell, 1994). Men are more focused on healthy food that tends to
increase strength, skill and muscular body more concerning fitness. In contrast, women
21
would like to eat healthy food that can help maintain a healthy weight or slim body
shape. Besides, foods are used to fulfil hunger as well as give essential nutrients to them
(Bhat & Bhat, 2011). In short, healthy eating habits can contribute to health, and a good
body weight. Therefore, due to differences between perceived and actual product
attributes, health foods are invariably the foremost consumers choice (Ruumpol, 2014).
2.4 Consumer Perception
Consumer perception is the process of which physical sensations such as sounds,
sights and smells are selected, organized, and interpreted (Beauprez, 2010). However,
consumer perceptions of foods shifts by various measurements such as healthiness (Ross
& Murphy, 1999), food label (Silverglade & Ringel Heller, 2010), food packaging (Enax
et al., 2015) and taste (Raghunathan, Naylor, & Hoyer, 2006). Consumer perception
toward healthy food can influence their food selection (Steptoe, Pollard, & Wardle,
1995). They will tend to eat healthy food and purchase food product which are labelled
with healthy claims. However, demographic factor including income level, family
structure, lifestyle, dietary restrictions and some social values and beliefs always stand
as the consumers preferences and food selection (Chang & Zepeda, 2005).
Food products can be more sustainably attractive when there are many kinds of
packaging design attributes such as attractive colours, pictures and images, shapes,
symbols, health claims and information. Consumers perceive a food product through all
of those elements of labelling and packaging appearance which can influence the healthy
food selection before making the purchase decision and it is also important for food
marketing strategies (Silayoi &
Speece, 2007). Generally, consumers use their
perception and knowledge to understand and how to use the Nutrition Information about
the health benefits of the food stated on the labels. Packaging design can influence
different consumers differently. People preferences are affected by the gender and age
and how they evaluate the healthy food product and package design. For example,
previous studies found out that more women read the nutrition information than men
(Grunert et al., 2010). In summary, the food product market can get higher sales when
the product is being well perceived. Therefore, the importance of this study is to carry
22
out researches on understanding consumers perception toward healthy food in order to

help healthy food producers enhance the development of their foods product in
Malaysian market. Furthermore, consumers perception of the food quality is
an
important behaviour or belief before making a purchasing decision (Rijswijk & Frewer,
2008).
2.5 Labelling and Packaging
Marketers modifying the label and packaging on food product is called as
placebo effects, that is altering experienced pleasantness and efficacy of an otherwise
identical product (Shiv, Carmon, & Ariely, 2005; Plassmann & Weber, 2015). Food
labelling uses studies focused on nutrition labels. Nutrition Claims and Information play
important roles to convey the products health information to customers. Food labelling
also help consumers make healthier choices (Ollberding, Wolf, & Contento, 2010). Food
labelling can educate consumers about the nutritional contents in the food and
recommended serving size. The information on labels may help consumers assess the
health and understand more their values before making informed purchasing choices
(Howard & Allen, 2006). Consumer can make a better decision when looking at the food
label information. Food labelling is an important marketing tool used by marketers
because it can transmit information about the ingredients of the product. The food
labelling is not only transmitting information to the consumer, but also it can be used as
a promotional tool for food producers and manufacturers to promote their products.
Despite the fact that food labels offers an extensive information about the quality of food
product, many kinds of design packaging leads consumers to select a non-healthy food
(Grunert et al., 2010). Thats due to the fact that numerous consumers do not have the
essential nutritional knowledge to clearly understand the food labelling and pick the
right healthy product. Normally, consumers will make comparisons between similar
products and interpret it in relation to their dietary requirements (Grunert et al., 2010).
Other than the labels of the food products, packaging also plays an important role
to promote the food product by way of its attractive appearance. Pilditch (1972) clarified
that food packaging can understand consumer needs and wants in healthy food so that
23
the sales will be increased. In other words, packaging can have a big impact on the final
decision made by consumers (Kuvykaite, Dovaliene, & Navickiene, 2009). Packaging
influences the customer perception before making the purchase decision through colour
and shape. Many food producer or manufacturer can be more successful in their business
because of the packaging design attributes (Ampuero & Vila, 2006). Colour and shape
can also influence the food perception as healthy or not. Therefore, package shape and
colour will be the symbolic meaning of health (Ruumpol, 2014). Within this research a
healthy food attribute packaging concerning the colour and shape is associated with
healthiness. The food package appearance tends to be judged as healthy or unhealthy by
consumers visually. Relying on packaging literatures analysis, food labelling is
associated with words including the claims and information. Whereas, packaging are
those creations that we can see including colour and shape. Each of these attributes will
be clarified further in the following sections.
2.5.1 Nutrition Claims
Food contains many essential nutrients vital to the normal functioning of the
human body systems. Proper nutrition is important for growth and repair, maintaining
the body temperature, providing energy and protection from diseases (Azman & Sahak,
2014).
Nutrition Claims are placed on the front of food the packages in order to replace
the complex nutrition table on the back (Kelley, Bresee, Cranor, & Reeder, 2009). This
is supported by consumers as a method of providing simplified and visible nutrition
information (Kelley et al., 2009). Claims helps consumer to make decision when buying
healthy food (Report, 2010). For example, 'low fat', 'sugar free', 'natural', ' heart healthy'
and so on. Nutrition Claims may attract consumers attention, give the product positive
image and aid positive perception by consumers. However, these labels may mislead
consumers sometimes. For example, Natural Valley's snack bar labels claims that the
product is 100% natural as seen in Figure 2.1 below. This implies a healthy food that the
customer may perceive. Yet the Nutrition Information label on the back of the package
24
tells a different story, the contents of saturated fat and three teaspoons of sugar.
Furthermore, some of the ingredients are sweeteners which are certainly not natural.
Figure2.3: Nature Valley snack bar
Adaption from: Winslow. Nature Valley: Not So Natural After All. 2012.
2.5.2 Nutrition Information
Nutrition Information plays a vital role in helping customers to make a correct
decision when in the process of purchasing. Consumers can find the healthy food
through the Nutrition Information on the back of the food package (Coulson, 2000). The
Nutrition Information can lead to misunderstanding the claims on the front package
(Hausman, 2000). Furthermore, it is hard to understand the Nutrition Information. Thus,
some of the consumers prefer a simpler and faster way to evaluate of the nutritional
characteristics of the healthy food (Hieke et al., 2015). Whereas, some other consumers
who are becoming more careful shoppers and paying more attention to Nutrition
Information tend to be more healthy and nutrition conscious (Coulson, 2000). In
addition, Nutrition Information gives a table content of nutrient food components such
as energy, sugar, vitamin, fat, and some other important nutrients. However, food
components should be processed in limited amounts with others that often are lacking in
the diet.
25
Figure 2.4: Understand and use the Nutrition Information
Adoption from: Food and Drug Administration. A Key to Choosing Healthful Foods:
Using the Nutrition Facts on the Food Label. 2012
2.5.3 Colour
A food products colour may influence consumers' perception and may also
influence the customer purchase decisions also (Grossman & Wisenblit , 1999). Some
consumer may process the purchase decision based on certain colours of the food
product (Martindale and Moore, 1998). Food companies take seriously its stand on
consumer view on how colour attributes affect purchase decision. This is because
consumers first sight of the food packaging is the colour. In addition, different cultural
associations will build different consumers response with different colour preferences
for various healthy food product (Grossman & Wisenblit, 1999). Acceptable colour of
consumer perceptions is linked with perceptions of healthy and diet food by following
the flavour, the nutrition and also with satisfaction levels. Moreover, positive effects on
healthy perception can be reached by conducting more than one packaging variable such
as the colour of packaging, transparent packs that can see the food colour, incident light,
26
and the brand name appearance (Imram, 1999; Silayoi & Speece, 2007). However, it is
important to understand well consumers colour associations as a basis for understanding
the emotional aspects of colour. This is because colours are important image cues.
Therefore, basic colours and consumers' emotion toward healthy food will be presented
in the coming paragraph.
Figure 2.5: Different colour of packaging influence customers perception
Adoption from: Morris. J. Controversial Colour Branding Decisions. 2014

Red: In the consumers eyes, red are generally exciting, cheerful, disobedient, and
powerful. (Thomas Sioutis, 2011). Using red for packaging colours will draw attention
to the product, since eyes actually look to red first and it fortifies the passionate
reactions and memory triggers (Moriarty, 1986). Different attributes connected with red
are costly, premium, excellent and great tasting (Grimes & Doole, 1998). Red is maybe
such an awesome colour for food labelling in light of the fact that the colour is found in
regular ordinarily sweet organic products, for example, berries, tomatoes, and melons.
Blue: Blue is perceived to be heavy, male, mature, cool, calm and mindful
(Grimes & Doole, 1998). There is no natural blue food. Besides that, blue can be found
in wide range of snacks packaging particularly in chips and treats for instance Crunch
Chocolate and Oreos.
Yellow: Yellow is perceived as the happiest colour (Moriarty, 1986). Premium
quality, extravagant, solid, light and great tasting connected with yellow (Grimes &
27
Doole, 1998). For example, Ferrero Rocher chocolate uses yellow with gold colour
packaging to imply that the product is luxurious.
Green: Green is perceived natural, pure, fresh and healthy for food labels
(Moriarty, 1986). It is likewise seen reasonable, light, solid and great tasting (Grimes &
Doole, 1998). Milo energy drink uses green packaging to indicate being natural and
healthy.
2.5.4 Shape
Changing the packaging shape plays an important role in food product
differentiation and it can also influence the consumer perception and purchase decisions
(Silayoi & Speece, 2004). Advancement in packaging shapes could help to make food
products more attractive and distinguish them from their rivals (Clement, Kristensen, &
Grnhaug, 2013). The shape of the packaging is a principal component for
accomplishment in the marketplace for different products (Wansink, 1996). Furthermore,
to be more unique shape packaging and to grab the consumers' attention. Diversification
in packaging shapes are intended to be more attractive for childrens food products
(Silayoi & Speece, 2004). It seems that children are more likely to try food products in
distinctive packaging shapes.
Packaging shapes and sizes depends on the different volume levels. Generally,
the larger the size and shape the more attractive it is for consumers. The effect of
package shape can influence in the purchasing decision when the quality of the product
is hard to determine. Therefore, the elongated shape causes the consumer to think of the
package as having better product volume and cost efficiency compare to round shape
(Silayoi & Speece, 2007). Generally, consumers try to find low priced products with
larger packaging and attractive offer.
28
Figure 2.6: Healthy biscuit shaped package based on consumers perception.
Adoption from: Foley. Nutritious Store-Bought Cookies. 2011

2.6 Previous Studies
There is abundance of previous researches that are applicable writing about
consumers preferences of food labelling and packaging. However limited researches
have been implemented about healthy food labelling and packages attribute and its
influence on consumers perception of health food product.
Several previous studies have related to the importance of nutrition knowledge
influences on consumer attitude. First study to be discussed is Orquin and Scholderer
(2015). Nutrition labelling policy of nutrition and health claims (NH claims) have to
allow for easy recognition of food healthfulness characteristics and consumers could
make healthier food choices. It is ensure that consumers are not misled by the nutrition
information. These studies suggest that consumers misled by NH claims are not in any
great danger. Such an impact could be classied as misleading because of semantic
confusion since consumers seems not to understand how organic products differ from
conventional products. The studies explain the health and nutrition claims and suggested
cases identified with brand product, package attribute, and imagery. The outcomes
demonstrate that health and nutrition claims might not be as misleading as suspected. In
fact, consumer judgements of food healthfulness influence by the claims. The claims had
29
effects on sensory expectations and purchase intentions for the carrier products. In
conclusion, these impacts for misleading claims and also for ofcially approved claims
propose to guide consumer food choice. The interaction between outcome dimension,
claim strength, and claim concreteness is illustrated in Figure 2.7 for the three dependent
variables.
Figure 2.7: Interactions between outcome dimension, claim strength, and claim
concreteness on perceived healthfulness, sensory expectation, and purchase intention.
Source: Orquin and Scholderer 2015

Vasiljevic, Pechey, & Marteau, (2015) research was done to understand how
colours on nutritional labels can influence the perception of healthiness in food and
aimed to compare between green labels and red labels with same calorie contents. The
research found out that the colour green was perceived as healthier than the colour red or
white. Moreover, a simple smiling or frowning emotion can inuence consumers
30
perception also. The combination of smiling and frowning emotions with different
colours could make consumers even more potent to signals of food healthiness. The gap
in this research is that it only tested the effects of colours in nutritional labels for an
unhealthy snack option (chocolate bar).
Figure 2.8: Sample of experimental stimuli.
Source: Vasiljevic, Pechey and Marteau 2015

Ares and Deliza in 2010 researched about the relationship between colour and
shape of the packaging attributes how it has an influence on the consumers attitude.
Word association and conjoint analysis were used to study the inuence of the
packaging shape and colour on consumer expectations of milk desserts. Shape and
colour can affect consumers expected liking scores and their sensory expectations. The
utilities of colours for expected liking and willingness to purchase is shown in Table 1
below. The results found that colour had higher part-worth utilities than shape,
indicating that the model package feature was more important for consumers. Colour
stand 82.5% for expected liking and willingness to purchase it was 88.4%. Round shape
had higher utility than square for expected liking. Regarding package colour, yellow
demonstrated the most astounding utility for expected liking, followed by white and
nally black packages. These outcomes demonstrate the significance of package
31
attributes, such as colour and shape impact in making tangible desires on consumers,
which could influence their product perception and acknowledgement.
Table 2.1: Conjoint analysis result for expected liking and willingness to
purchase scores.
Source: Aschemann-Witzel 2013

On the other hand, Aschemann-Witzel 2013 found out that the front-of-pack
nutrition label can inuence consumers health food choices and that it is an important
indicator of healthful choices, depending on the size of the food choice set that is made
accessible to purchasers. This study was carried to investigate consumers preferred
choices and whether the different label formats can affect consumers motivation to
make healthful food decisions. This study is show the packages design that combined
nutrition label elements with the size of the choice set. The results showed that initial
choice made by consumers is to reconsider their purchase decision. To improve the
healthfulness of choice exceeds the improvement that would have came about because
of irregular decision. The nutrition labels did not increase consumers wellbeing
intention when settling on food decision. However, participants communicated a higher
perceived ability of picking a healthier food in the presence of colour coding when
requested to make healthy decision.
32
Marshalls, Stuarts & Bell (2006) research are done to focus on preferred
packaging colour of cereals, biscuits and drinks among pre-schoolers classes by age and
gender. This research was conducted by asking the children to pick any favourite
packages, one for the boy and another one for the girl. Targeted children choose the
favourite colour of packages. The results showed a high relationship between favourite
colour and choice of product over the total sample, with lower connections for
individuals. Favourite colours were pink, purple, yellow and blue were respectively to
24%, 11.4% , 9% and 9% and pink colour were most famous colours which stand for
40.9%, and then the purple colour were 15% and yellow were 15%. The relationship
between boys and girls were lower when selecting, with children more prone to choose
colour that achieved their preferences (Marshall, Stuart, & Bell, 2006).
This research undertaken by Silayoi and Speece (2004; 2007) found out that
there are four main packaging attributes that can affect the consumers purchase decision.
They are divided into two categories which are visual and informational attributes. First
is the visual attributes, it relates to the effective side of the decision making which
includes graphics and size or shape. Second is the informational attributes used in the
package which relates to the information provided and its more inclined to address the
cognitive side of choice making.
Silayoi and Speece (2004) attempted to understand consumers behaviour toward
the design of the food packages and how it can influence the purchasing choices. The
results of their study suggested that visual elements such as graphics and colour
influence consumer choice. However careful participants will evaluate food product
quality by reading the label. Moreover, simple and clear information on the packaging
generates strong impact on the consumers purchase decision. In 2007 Silayoi and
Speece again did another study to perform a conjoint analysis in order to investigate the
significance of different packaging designs attributes on the consumers at Bangkok,
Thailand. They found out that straight shapes had a positive influence compared to
curvy shapes, as does classic simple designs on the package compared to a colourful
design. This suggests that consumers are more attracted to a package that seems familiar
33
and reliable, rather than exciting. The design of food products packaging should be
ought to have the capacity to convey healthiness and safety, rather than excitement.
2.7 Summary
The literature review in this chapter discusses how four elements of food
labelling and packaging influences the consumers perception towards healthy food
products in different ways. Nutrition Claims, Nutrition Information, colour and shape
have bigger impact on consumer perception. Nutrition Claims and Nutrition Information
can help consumers to make a healthy food choice but also can mislead consumers who
do not read well the details of the information provided. Besides, natural looking colours
like green may be more attractive to consumers who tend to go for healthy eating.
However, red colour packaging is bright enough for the eye to notice it at the place of
purchase. Regarding the shape, it seems that consumers prefer elongated shapes more
than curvy or short shapes, because it looks like it has more quantity of the food inside it.
34
Chapter 3 Methodology
3.1 Introduction
This chapter is the research of methodology which is an approach to examine the
hypotheses in conceptual framework and explains the research design. Section 3.3
explains the sample selection. Section 3.4 follows up on the sources of data which is
primary data and secondary data. Next section is the operationalization of the variables
and the pilot testing. Section 3.8 provides the statistical procedures used to analyse the
data. It also deals with the issues associated with validity and reliability by using
correlation analysis and regression analysis. Furthermore, the goal of this chapter is to
ensure that the readers have a better comprehension and assessment of the results,
process and examination.
3.2 Research Model
Figure 3.1 shows the research framework developed and the four hypotheses
proposed to be tested in this study. The figure below shows the four independent
variables which are the Nutrition Claims, Nutrition Information, colour and shapes of
the packages that affect the dependent variable which is consumer perception toward
health food. Based on chapter two the below research framework is proposed.
35
Figure 3.1: Proposed Research Framework

Dependent
Variable
Independent
Variable
Nutrition Claims
H1
H2
H3
Colour
Customer Perception
on healthy food
H4
Shape
Source: Self developed research
Given the preceding discussion, the following hypotheses are proposed:
H1: There is a significant relationship between Nutrition Claims and customer
perception of healthy food.
H2: There is a significant relationship between Nutrition Information and customer
H3: There is a significant relationship between the colour of the packages and
customer perception of healthy food.
H4: There is a significant relationship between shape of the packages and customer
3.3 Sampling Size
The size of the sample is a very important factor for researchers (Zikmund, 2003).
While a bigger sample size would generally provide a more accurate result, researchers
are often constrained by time and cost factors (Saunders, Lewis, & Thornhill, 2009). So
rather than maximum sample size, the more realistic optimal sample size is often used.
Therefore, the sampling required to perform and experiments consists of the research
36
sampling size, target respondents and sampling method references with a qualitative
perspective via analysis.
3.3.1 Sample Size
200 respondents of sample size were chosen to complete the survey. Total of 200
grocery shoppers will be involved to help answering the question in shopping areas in
Jusco, Malacca. Besides that, it can help to lower down the cost and reduce the time to
collect data by only survey 200 grocery shoppers. There will be 200 questionnaires to be
distributed, however there might occurs some incomplete questionnaires due to the
shoppers time constraints, and also because some of the shoppers might not want to
participate as they might consider the questionnaires invading their privacy or waste of
their time.
In G*Power, the aggregate sample size is the quantity of the subject summed all
group of the design. G*Power (Faul, Erdfelder, Buchner, & Lang, 2009) is a statistical
measurement to examination program ordinarily for the social, behavioural and
biomedical sciences. In this study, researcher use F test, correlation and regression in
order to estimate the sample size of the survey. Figure 3.2 depicts the output parameter
of critical F=2.444766 and the total sample size is 129 as a minimum size of respondent
is complete. Researcher use software to show the central and non-central distributions
and X-Y plot for a range of value, respectively in figure 3.2 and 3.3 in next page.
37
Figure 3.2: Central and non-central distributions
Figure 3.3: X-Y plot for a range of value
38
Sources: Self developed research

3.3.2 Target Respondents
The targeted population is the grocery shoppers comprising males and females
who are aged from 18 to 60 above years old. These target respondents can help the
researcher understand how different genders and ages might have different perception
over healthy food. In general, men wanting a more muscular body are focused on
healthy food that tends to increase power and strength. In contrast, women would like to
eat healthy food that can help maintain a healthy weight or slim body shape. Other than
this, different sport level of the consumers will consume different healthy food. Target
respondents are very important part of the sample size because researcher can make a
better conclusion by focusing on the consumers.
3.3.3 Sampling Method
In order to understanding the individual or human issues, qualitative research is a
method for investigating and comprehension. In this qualitative research, nonprobability sampling is used to choose the population to study. Since qualitative research
is generally focused on a small number yet the determination participant shopper and
examination the overall usefulness of the research findings. According to Fink, nonprobability sampling can be a sampling method to implementing a pilot study. It is also
overlooked the costs and barrier in figure sample frame. In addition, non-probability
sampling is researcher may keep explaining to every respondents and usually used in
questionnaires survey (Freytag-leyer, Socio-ecology, & Households, 2015). 200
questionnaires is counting no much or less, but this sampling method can help to reduce
cost of sampling and also saving time.
Quantitative research is to examining the relationship among variables (Freytagleyer et al., 2015). These variables can be measured on instruments based on question
contain performance data, attitude data and observational data. The data were collected
and then analysed using statistical procedures.
39
3.4 Sources of Data

There are two types of data which are primary data and secondary data. The data
collected will help to accomplishment the research objectives and also the hypotheses
proposed. Besides that, it will affect the reliability and validity of the test conducted.
Therefore, it can help researchers to have a better understanding and more clear of the
results.
3.4.1 Primary Data
Primary data is to help to solving a certain problem using the data collected by
researched (Bryman & Bell, 2007). After collecting from the questionnaire, primary data
started to form. It is the way the researcher developed and gathered the information at
first-hand experience (Ghauri & Grnhaug, 2005). Therefore, questionnaires are used in
this research. Primary data can be expensive and time consuming. This sort of survey
will be completed by the respondents on their own without an interview. Questionnaires
are distributed to every respondents hand and will be collected once they finish
answering the questionnaires.
3.4.2 Secondary Data
Secondary data obtained by analysing the data collected for some different
purposes than solving the current issue and it is always readily available. Secondary data
are cheaper and time saving than the primary data. In this research, the data are collected
from databases, website and libraries due to its low cost and save some time. Besides
that, useful method and better understanding used to support this research is reference
books.
3.5 Operationalization of the Variables
Operationalization is seen as a procedure that changes over the dynamic
variable into rationale variable in research (Ghauri & Grnhaug, 2005; Bryman & Bell,
2007). In other words, a theoretical definition leads to an operational definition. It is a
process that interconnect the study with the present reality world practice (Bryman &
40
Bell, 2007). In the beginning, three steps will provide before to get the data collection,
there are theoretical insights, listing potential variables, selecting variables (Bryman
& Bell, 2007).
From the view of the literature in chapter two, the research questions were
formed by used the questionnaire for this study. Therefore, as seen in Figure 3.1 below
there is a relationship between literature review and the research model in this
operationalization. The five key constructs of the proposed research framework:
Nutrition Claims, Nutrition Information, colour, shape and customer perception. The
questions were developed based on the theories that will be applied to the focus groups
and connected to the operationalization.
Table 3.1: Operationalization
Variable
Author
Item
Nutrition
Botonaki et al., 2006
Example Item
1. When I buy a food product, I
Claims
always read the label.

Silverglade & Ringel
2. The
Nutrition
Claims
for
organic and less sugar is
Heller, 2010
chaotic.
Nayga, 1999
3. By
reading
food
labels
on
packages I can easily choose the

healthy foods.
4. Attractive Nutrition Claims on
the food labels can make me
willing to try.
Nutrition
Azzurra and Paola, 6
Information
2009
1. The information in the label is

difficult to understand.
2. The information on healthy foods
is truthful.
41
Arslanagi et al., 2014
3. I read the nutrition information

before buying a healthy food
product.
4. I am not interested in the
nutritional attributes of the food
products that I eat.
5. Nutritional Information is written
in too small letters.
Colour
Ruumpol, 2014
1. Red colour and black colour food

packaging
normally
will
be
perceived less healthy.

2.
Green colour package perceived

more healthy food than other
colour.
Vasiljevic, Pechey and
3. Rating of tastiness of healthy
Marteau, 2015
food by looking at the package

colour.
Eldesouky
and
4. Packaging colour will influence
Mesias., 2014
me to purchase the food product.

5. Packaging colour will grab my
attention.
6. Colour of the product has a great
influence in the first purchase.
Shape
Ruumpol, 2014
1. I perceive the healthy food by

looking at the packages shape.
2. Elongated
shapes
will
be
perceived as more healthy than a

round shape packages.
42
Witzel et al., 2013
3. Influence of the shape on the

healthfulness of the food choices.
4. The shape of a food product
affects my buying decision.
5. Shape of the product has a great
Consumer
Yang (2004)
1. When I like the food, I will buy it
perception
without too much deliberation.

Azzurra and Paola,
2. Healthy is the important element
2009
that influences my food choices.

3. I will to pay more expensive in
order to choose my healthier
option.
Ruumpol, 2014
4. Healthy claims on the package

will
influence
more
my
perception on healthy food than

the design is less healthy.
Nayga, 1999
5. I have healthy dietary habits
3.6 Data Collection

Total of 200 questionnaires will distribute to consumers whom will shopping in
Malacca shopping mall. The respondents will asked to predicate their level of agreement
or disagreement with a series of statements based on a five-point Likert scale, ranging
from one (strongly disagree) to five (strongly agree).
3.6.1 Questionnaires
Questionnaire will conducted among grocery shoppers in Malacca, Malaysia.
This survey was designed to examine how consumers perceived healthy food products
and which independent variable are strongest affects their behaviour intention to
43
purchase the food products packages. The questionnaire to be used is consisted of the
food labelling and packaging attributes on consumer purchase decisions toward healthy
food. It is composed of 32 questions. The constructs will measure to using a five-point
Likert scale, with one representing strongly disagree and five representing strongly agree
shown in figure 3.2. English language will be used in the question divided into two parts.
Part one is will be ask the question regarding to which packaging attributes caught
consumers first attention, physical activity enjoyable and health level. It composes of
four questions (Q1-4). Part two will designed in the factors influencing consumer
perception towards healthy label food based on Nutrition Claims, Nutrition Information,
colour and shape which compose of 37 questions. Part three aim to inquire general
question which is gender, age, marital status and monthly family income.
Figure 3.4: Five-point Likert scale
Strongly disagree 1
5 Strongly agree
3.7 Pilot Testing

Pilot study is conducted in order to make sure the survey questions is well
understood and function as it is expected to (Bryman, 2008). The pre-test survey
questions will request 20 shopper respondents to help to answer. This pilot testing can
avoid any mistakes or misunderstanding in the question. The Feedback will be
considered to make the appropriate changes to the questions if needed, to improve the
survey question and also correct some spelling errors. After doing the pre-testing survey,
the researcher will fix before eventually publishing the survey. The purpose of the pilot
test is to identify the question errors in the questionnaires and to test the reliability and
validity.
3.8 Data Analysis
The 200 valid questionnaires will be analysed. According to Bryman and Bell
(2007), the collected questionnaires will used mathematical formula and computer
software to analysing the data results. For the quantitative results, will be analysed using
44
SPSS version 22. For this study purposes, choosing an appropriate method to analysed
the results will be apply validity and reliability analysis and then apply correlation and
regression analysis (Malhotra & Birks, 2003)
3.8.1 Validity and Reliability
Validity and Reliability are the most important aspects of questionnaire design.
According to Suskie (1996), a reliable questionnaire leads to consistent responses.
3.8.1.1 Validity
Validity is concerned with whether the findings are really about what they
appear to be about (Saunders et al., 2009). Validity stand for appropriateness, important,
and usefulness of inferences made by the analyst on the information (Wallen & Fraenkel,
2001). Validity tests will be employed content validity. Content validity involves a
systematic but subjective assessment of how well a scale measures the construct or
variable of interest. It also calls as face validity. Two hundred grocery shoppers from
various socio-demographic and household incomes completed the questionnaire.
Respondents use 5 or 10 min to complete the questionnaire. The questionnaire
instructions are considered easy to understand.
3.8.1.2 Reliability
Reliability refers to the consistency and stability of a score from a measurement
scale (Davis, 2005). Cronbachs alpha coefficient () method is to test reliability which
evaluating the reliability for a measurement scale with multiple items measure and
question (Hayes, 1998). The coefficient reflects among a set of items from 0 to 1.
Besides, reliability test that are less than 0.6 is considered as poor and the range of 0.7
and 0.8 are acceptable and good respectively (Sekaran, 2002). However, a good
reliability should give at least a coefficient value of 0.70 (Pallant, 2001). A total of 40
questionnaires survey data will be analysed by using reliability test, it will implement by
using Statistical Package for the Social Science (SPSS) version 22. After that,
correlation and regression analysis is used to examine the possible results that might
bring to understanding of consumers perception on healthy food product.
45
3.8.2 Correlation Analysis

Correlation analysis is a method to deal with conclusion of population approach
to increase validity and reliability (Al-shaaban & Nguyen, 2014). Pearson correlation
coefficient (r-value) apply to measures the strength of linear relationship between the
independent variables consisted of Nutrition Claims, Nutrition Information, colour and
shape and the dependent variable which is the consumer perception on healthy food
product. However, the power of the relationship varies from weak to strong. Perfect
positive relationship of Pearson correlation coefficient is + 1.00 and -1.00 refer to
perfect negative relationship (Munro, 2005). Besides, the higher the correlation is the
more similar the variables (Bryman & Bell, 2007).
3.8.3 Regression Analysis
Regression analysis is a powerful and flexible to examining the relationships
between four independent variables and a dependent variable (Bryman & Bell, 2007).
Four hypotheses were presented for this research. Multiple linear regressions is a
statistical technique uses Nutrition Claims, Nutrition information, colour and shape
based on independent variables to predict dependent variable which is consumer
perception. Multiple linear regression tests using standard regression method to explain
the consumer perception on the healthy food according satisfaction level. The
descriptive statistic will be apply to prove the important of food labelling and packaging
influence consumers perception on healthy food product. Moreover, regression analysis
will implement on adjusted r-value, Beta, and significance level.
3.9 Summary chapter
This chapter introduces the research design and explained why surveys are better
method to use and appropriate to use in this research. Pilot testing will conducted to
ensure have a better questionnaire without errors and to ensure validity and reliability
was undertaken from beginning to the final survey. Next chapter will discuss analysis of
data more detail.
46
Chapter 4 Research Findings and Discussion

4.1 Introduction
In this chapter, the results of this study are tabulated and discussed by using
Statistical Software Package for Social Science (SPSS) version 22 to compute and
analyse the data. First, a descriptive analysis of the variables, Mean analysis, Pearsons
correlation analysis and multiple linear regression analysis will be uses to explain the
packaging design influence consumers perception. Last, section 4.6 concludes with the
chapter summary.
In this survey, 200 respondents were involved to help answering the question in
the shopping mall Malacca. Young people are involving this survey more than people
over 60 years old because most of them cannot see well everyday task like reading due
to aging eyes. Lastly, in this chapter will show the hypothesis testing results. The
purpose of hypothesis testing is to make a decision whether the packaging attributes
influences consumers perception or not.
4.2 Descriptive Analyses
Descriptive analyses are used to explain the sample characteristic of the typical
respondents and disclosure the general pattern of the response. There are some usable
charts and tables to help understand and explain the respond from our target respondents
on section one and three of the thesis questionnaire.
47
4.2.1 Demographic Profile of Respondents
120
100
80
Female
60
Male
40
20
0
Male
Female
Source: Survey Data, 2016

Figure 4.1: Gender of respondents
Questionnaires were distribution to 200 grocery shoppers at Melaka. Figure 4.1
shows a bar chart about 200 respondents, 95 were males and 105 were females.
1%
Ages
14%
10%
18-30
31-45
75%
46-60
60 above

Figure 4.2: Ages of respondents
Figure above shows the ages of respondents who are participant in this research.
150 (75%) of respondents is 18-30 years old, 21 (10%) of respondents is 31-45 years old,
27 (14%) of respondents is 46-60 years old and only 2 (1%) of respondents is 60 above.
48
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
Married
Single
Single
Married

Figure 4.3: Marital Status of Respondents
A bar charts above illustration marital status of the respondents. There are 159 (79.5%)
of single and 41 (20.5%) of married.

35%
45%
Less than Rm1000

Rm1000 - Rm2000
20%
More than Rm 2000

Figure 4.4: Monthly Family Income
In this research can found that majority of the respondents monthly family
income is more than Rm 2000 which is stand of 45%, 35% of respondents have earn less
than Rm 1000 per month and 20% of respondents have Rm1000 Rm 2000 monthly
income.
49
Different Labels and Packages of

Healthy Food
The color of the packages
19%
27%
33%
The shape of the packages

The Nutrition Information
on the packages
21%
The Nutrition Claims on

the packages

Figure 4.5: Different labels and packages of healthy food
According to the consumers perception by first attention, the Nutrition
Information on the packages was the most noticeable labels of healthy food. 65 persons
marked it as the first things that caught their attention, it is equal to 33% of the
participants. The colour of the packages was caught first by 27% of the participants,
which means 55 persons. The shape of the packages was noticed first by 43persons
which represents 21% of the participants. Only 37 persons paid attention to the Nutrition
Claims, meaning 19%.
Physical Activity
2%
22%
Never
49%
27%
Sometimes
Usually
Always

Figure 4.6: Physical Activity
50
Question number two (2) in the questionnaire was about physical activity that
consumer carry through in daily life. People are interested in healthy food will give at
least a little thought to the healthfulness of their diet, physical activity and the safety of
their food by looking at the labels and packages. The majority report that 98 (49%) of
the respondents sometimes will exercise, they consider themselves active and 54 (27%)
of the respondents are usually exercise in daily life to keep their health well, they
consider themselves to be vigorously active. Interestingly, 44 out of 200 respondents
which is 22% are always exercise, they are consistently physically active than to
consistently eat a healthful diet. There have only 2% of the respondents never want to
exercise, they consider themselves to be sedentary.

10%
3%
Poor
27%
16%
Fair
Good
44%
Very Good
Excellent

Figure 4.7: Overall Health Status
Question number three in questionnaire was about how consumers describe their health.
88 out of 200 grocery shoppers describe their health as good. The 55 people (27%)
report that their health is fair and 16% which is 31 respondents (16%) describe their
health is very good because they are trying to improve their diet. Lastly, about 20 in 200
respondents which are 10% have tried to eat more healthy food when choosing the food
by design packages and 3% reporting their health is poor or not too healthful.
4.2.2 Summary of Demographic Characteristics
This section examines the profile of respondents which have total 200. Table 1 shows a
summary of demographic characteristics
51
Table 4.1: Summary of Demographic Characteristics

Demographic
Characteristics
Sample (n= 200)
Frequency
Percent (%)
Male
Female
95
105
47.5
52.5
Age
18-30
31-45
46-60
60 above
150
21
27
2
75.0
10.5
13.5
1.0
Marital status
Single
Married
159
41
79.5
20.5
71
40
89
35.5
20.0
44.5
Gender
Monthly family income

Less than Rm 1000
Rm 1000 Rm 2000
More than Rm 2000
This study was conducted in shopping malls Malacca, all participants are grocery
shoppers who responsible for the food shopping of their household. There have total 200
grocery shoppers are participate in the survey, 95 or 47.5% males and 105 or 52.5%
were females presents in table 1. Females are the majority of the samples because
females used to be responsible for food shopping more often than males. The majority of
participants aged between 18- 30 years old are 75%. 21 of the respondents (10.5%) are
31- 45 years old, 27 of the respondents (13.5%) are 46-60 years old and only have 2
respondents are above 60 years old because most of them have eyes problem to read the
questionnaire. The majority of the respondents earned more than Rm2000 monthly
household income (44.5%) while most respondents are single (79.5%).
52
Table 4.2: Summary of Important Attributes in Daily Life

Demographic
Frequency
Percent (%)
The colour of the packages
55
27.5
The shape of the package
43
21.5
65
32.5
37
18.5
2.0
Sometimes
98
49.0
Usually
54
27.0
Always
44
22.0
Poor
3.0
Fair
55
27.5
Good
88
44.0
Very Good
31
15.5
Excellent
20
10.0
Characteristics
Sample (n= 200)
Different
Labels
and
Packages of Healthy Food
The Nutrition Information

on the packages
The Nutrition Claims on
the packages
Physical Activity
Never

Table 4.2 presents the summary of important attributes in customer daily life in this
research. Demographic characteristics of the research are consists of different labels and
packages of healthy food, physical activity and overall health status.
53
4.3 Mean Analysis

Table 4.3: Mean and standard deviation for the labels and packages of healthy food
Variable
Mean
Standard Deviation
Nutrition Claims
3.60
0.76
3.71
0.58
Colour
3.34
0.67
Shape
2.95
0.82
Consumers Perception
3.53
0.67
Results are the means based on five point scale, where 1 indicates strongly disagree
and 5 indicates Strongly Agree.
The study assessed important packaging attributes as perceived by consumers. Results in
Table 4.3 show that consumer acknowledge the useful of packaging particularly in term
of Nutrition Information on the back of packages (mean score 3.71), Nutrition Claims on
front of the packages (3.60), colour of the packages (3.34) and shape of the packages
(2.95).
4.4 Pearsons Correlation Analysis
Table 4.4: Correlation between packaging design and consumers perception
Consumers
Nutrition Nutrition
Nutrition
Pearson
Claims
Correlation
Claims
Information Colour
Shape
Perception
.147*
.306**
.144*
.657**
.038
.000
.042
.000
200
200
200
200
200
.147*
-.078
.087
.140*
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
Nutrition
Pearson
Information
Correlation
54
Colour
Sig. (2-tailed)
.038
.275
.221
.048
200
200
200
200
200
.306**
-.078
.539**
.360**
Sig. (2-tailed)
.000
.275
.000
.000
200
200
200
200
200
.144*
.087
.539**
.215**
Sig. (2-tailed)
.042
.221
.000
200
200
200
200
200
.657**
.140*
.360**
.215**
Sig. (2-tailed)
.000
.048
.000
.002
200
200
200
200
Pearson
Correlation
Shape
Pearson
Correlation
Consumers
Pearson
Perception
Correlation
*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Table 4.5: Rule of thumbs of correlation analysis

Coefficient Range
Strength of Association
0.91 to 1.00
Very Strong
0.71 to 0.90
High
0.41 to 0.70
Moderate
0.21 to 0.40
0.00 to 0.20
Small
but
definite
relationship
Slight almost negligible
Source: Hair J Money A Samouel P &Page M (2007)
55
.002
200
The above correlations in table 4.4 show that the consumers perception has
significant (p < 0.05) and positive correlations with the other four labels and packaging
which are Nutrition Claims, Nutrition Information, colour and shape. The positive
correlation coefficient 0.657 are indicates that there is a statistically significant (p <
0.001) linear relationship between these two variables such that the Nutrition Claims on
front of packages will influence more consumers perception on healthy food. By
referring to Table 5, the value for the correlation coefficient which is 0.449 which is falls
under the coefficient range of 0.41 to 0.70. Hence, this indicates a moderate
relationship between Nutrition Claims and Consumers perception towards healthy food.
There is relationship between colour and shape of the packages and consumers
perception. Since the significant value for colour and shape of the packages and
consumers perception toward healthy food less than alpha value 0.05. Thus, this
indicates a small but definite relationship between colour and shape of the packages and
consumers perception.
Also observe that there is a statistically significant (p <0.005) positive correlation
coefficient (0.140) for association between Nutrition Information on back of packages
and consumers perception toward healthy food, although this is fairly weak. As a result
of slight almost negligible between Nutrition Information on back of packages and
consumers perception. Therefore, it is possible to separate the effects that the different
independent variables have on the dependent variables (Pallant, 2001).
4.5 Reliability Analysis
Table 4.6: Summary of Reliability Analysis Result
Level of Attributes
Variables
Cronbachs Alpha Result
Nutrition Claims
Independent Variable
0.724
0.724
Colour
0.780
Shape
0.867
Consumers perception
Dependent Variable
0.728
56

Table 4.6 presents reliability analysis, all attributes including independent and dependent
variables were to be good reliability with all the Cronbachs Alpha results are of above
0.6. According to Sekaran (2003), alpha coefficients less than 0.6 are poor, those in the
0.7 range are considered acceptable in most social science research situations, and those
over 0.8 are considered as good result.
4.6 Multiple Linear Regression Analysis
Multiple regression analysis was performed to determine the relationship
between packaging attribution and consumers perception toward healthy food. Multiple
Linear Regression Analysis estimates the coefficients of a linear equation, involving one
or more independent variables to predict the best value of the dependent variable. These
is also used in statistical technique in the behavioural sciences(Hankins, French, &
Horne, 2000). The packaging attributes consists of Nutrition Claims, Nutrition
Information, colour and shape of the packages while the consumers perception
constitutes the dependent variable. The results will shows as below in Table 7, 8 and 9.
Table 4.7: Multiple Linear Regressions
Model Summary
Model
R
0.682a
R Square
0.465
Adjusted R
Std. Error of
Square
the Estimate
0.454
0.49560
a. Predictors: (Constant), Nutrition Claims, Nutrition Information, Colour, Shape

b. Dependent Variable: Consumers perception
This table display R, R Square, adjusted R Square and standard error of the estimate. R
is the correlation between the observed and predicted values of the dependent variable.
The value of R is range from -1 to 1. The sign of R indicates the positive relationship in
this research. Typically, values of R2 below 0.2 are considered weak, between 0.2 and
0.4 considered moderate and strong when above 0.4. In this research, the R2 value, 0.465
57
showed that Nutrition Claims, Nutrition Information, colour and shape of the packages
predicted approximately only 46.5% of the variations in consumers perception toward
healthy food.
Table 4.8: AVONA Test
Model
Sum of
df
Mean Square
Sig.
Regression 41.672
10.418
42.415
.000b
Residual
47.896
195
0.246
Total
89.568
199
Squares
a. Dependent Variable: Consumers Perception

b. Predictors: (Constant), Nutrition Claims, Nutrition Information, Colour, Shape
Besides R Squared, ANOVA analysis also uses to check how well the model fits the
data in this research. The F statistic is the regression mean square (MSR) divided by
residual mean square (MSE) (Pallant, 2001). Table 8 depict the F-value is 42.415 and pvalue is 0.000 which is smaller than 0.05 (p < 0.05) then the independent variable
include Nutrition Claims, Nutrition Information, colour and shape of the packages do a
good job explaining the variation in the dependent variable which is consumers
perception.
Table 4.9: Coefficients
Model
1
Unstandardized
Standardized
Coefficients
Coefficients
Std. Error
(Constant)
.744
.309
Nutrition Claims
.524
.050
Nutrition Information .073

Colour
Shape
Sig.
2.407
.017
.593
10.591
.000
.063
.062
1.154
.250
.164
.066
.164
2.488
.014
.029
.052
.036
.568
.571
a. Dependent Variable: Consumers perception

58
Beta
Finally, the last table will to determine whether packaging attributes and
consumers perception are significantly related, and their direction and strength of their
relationship. The greater value is Nutrition Claims which is 0.524 follow by colour of
the packages which is 0.164. According to value, the Nutrition Claims has the greatest
impact as compare to colour of the packages.
According to the table 9 above, the p-value for Nutrition Claims is 0.000 which
is less than significant level of 0.05 and the unstandardized coefficient is 0.524. This is
mean that Nutrition Claims were to increase by one unit, consumers perception would
increase with 0.524. Thus, there is significant relationship between Nutrition Claims and
consumers perception toward healthy food. Hence, the hypothesis 1 is accepted.
In the multiple regression analysis Nutrition Information have an unstandardized
coefficient of 0.73 which would indicate a positive relationship between the two
constructs. However, the value is no significant because p-value more than 0.05 (p >
0.05) which is 0.250 and therefore hypothesis 2 is rejected.
Moreover, colour of the packages have a significant unstandardized coefficient
of 0.164 which is supports hypothesis 3, proving that colour have a positive effect on
consumers perception toward healthy food whereby p-value is 0.14 which is less than
significant level of 0.05. Hence, the hypothesis 3 is accepted.
The p-value for the shape of packages is 0.571 which is more than the significant
level of 0.05 but the unstandardized coefficient is 0.29 which would indicate a positive
relationship between two constructs. In other words, positive shape is judged as less
important compared to negative shape. Therefore, hypothesis 4 is rejected.
59
Table 4.10: Summary of Hypothesis Testing Results

Hypothesis
Result
H1: There is a significant relationship between Nutrition Claims Support

and customer perception of healthy food.
H2: There is a significant relationship between Nutrition Not Support
Information and customer perception of healthy food.
H3: There is a significant relationship between the colour of the Support
packages and customer perception of healthy food.
H4: There is a significant relationship between shape of the Not Support
packages and customer perception of healthy food.
Figure 4.8: Histogram

The figure above shows that the histogram is appearing normal. The plot is a
check on normality and a fitted normal distribution aids in the research consideration.
60
Figure 4.9: Normal P-P Plot Regression Standardized Residual

This is a Normal probability-probability (P-P) plot based on the standardized
residuals. On the X axis is the Observed Cumulative Probability based on the percentiles
in the frequency distribution of the residuals. The Y axis is based on taking the
Standardized Residual (Z-score). By observe the figure 10 that the circles all lie quite
close to the line called as normal distribution. Although there is a little random wriggle
about the line but this is does not mean disqualify these data from being normal. Thus,
the data is normal and the trend is indeed slight.
61
Figure 4.10: Scatterplot

The above scatterplot of standardized residuals against predicted values should
be a random pattern centred around the line of zero standard residual value. The points
should have the same dispersion about this line over the predicted value range. Figure 10
depicts no clear relationship between the residuals and the predicted value which is
consistent with the assumption of linearity. The dispersion of residuals over the
predicted value range between -1 and 1 look constant, for predicted values below -1
there is too few points to provide evidence against a change in variability.
62
4.7 Cross Tabulation

Table 4.11: Cross Tabulation of different label and packages of healthy food and Gender
The nutrition
information
The colour of The shape on on
The nutrition
the claims on the
packages
the package
packages
packages
Total
28
20
35
12
95
Female 27
23
30
25
105
55
43
65
37
200
Gender Male
Total
Table 4.11 provides cross tabulation of the relationship between packaging attributes of
consumers perception and demographic factors. Of the 200 of respondents, the majority
of respondents are 35 male was looking at Nutrition Information on the packages to
determine the healthy food and 30 females tend to choose healthy food by looking at
Nutrition Information.
4.8 Summary
In this chapter, data analysis methods, study results and a discussion of the
findings have been presented. Findings from this study have been found to be consistent
with the findings of several related studies on packages attributes and consumers
perception toward healthy foods. Data findings were described as correlation analysis,
regression analysis and multiple linear regression analysis to the study variables and also
presented as tabulations. In the next chapter, the discussion and implication of the
findings for packages attributes influences consumers perception. The limitation and
recommendation to this study will be also presented.
63
Chapter 5 Conclusion and Recommendation

5.1 Introduction
In this chapter the conclusion derived from the findings of this study on the
influence of labels and packages on consumers perception toward healthy labelled
food are described. The conclusion is based on the result obtained in chapter 4. The
findings from the study are used to discuss whether the hypotheses are supported. The
research objective will be determined after research questions were answered. The
discussion and implication of these findings and limitation of the research were
discussed in detail. Recommendation for the future research is mentioned. The chapter
concludes with a summary of this research study.
5.2 Research Findings and Discussion
This study is to present the labels and packaging attributes that are most
significant in influencing consumers perception toward healthy labelled food. This
study contributes to the literature for future research. The research findings provide a
better understanding of packaging attributes and consumers make healthy food choices.
The findings indicate that Nutrition Claims, Nutrition Information and shape of the
packages are influence consumers perception on healthy food.
There are four hypotheses proposed in this study. The summary of hypothesis
testing results is show in table 4.10. There is four research question raised in this study.
First question asked whether there is any relationship between Nutrition Claims on the
front of the packages and consumers perception of the health benefits of the food
product? This finding shows that Nutrition Claims is positively related to the consumers
perception toward healthy food.
Second question asked whether there is any relationship between Nutrition
Information on the back of the packages and consumers perception of the health
benefits of the food product? This finding shows that Nutrition Information negatively
related to the consumers perception toward healthy food.
64
Third question asked whether there is any relationship between the colour of the
packages and consumers perception of the health benefits of the food product? The
outcome from this study shows there have positive significantly the colour of the
packages affects consumers perception toward healthy food.
Finally, fourth question asked whether there is any relationship between the
shape of the packages and consumers perception of the health benefits of the food
product? The outcome from this study show there have negative significantly the shape
of the packages affects consumers perception toward healthy food. From the finding
shows all the independent variables are positive relationship with dependent variables
which is consumers perception.
5.3 Managerial Implications
The managerial implications of the paper are evident in several conclusions. In
this study shows the packaging attributes of the food product and important of a healthy
lifestyle in the food consumption segment. Next, gender has to be target separately
because they have different perception of healthy food packaging. These findings are
useful for food manufacturers, Nutrition Claims on the front of the packages may
increase consumption volume and increase sales volumes of foods. Hence, Nutrition
Claims such as low fat, no-sugar added etc., food are used by manufacturer to attract
consumers who make their choice based on food packaging.
In addition, marketers could better understanding consumers perception toward
healthy food on the packaging attributes. Nutrition Claims, Nutrition Information, colour
and shape of the packages have different influences in consumer decision making. It
particularly indicates which packaging attributes to have greater impact on the
perception by different consumer. Case in point, health conscious consumers tend to
focus more on Nutrition Information and colour of the packages in making their
decisions. With increasing number of health conscious and computer savvy consumers,
making Nutrition Information readily available online would give manufacturers a
competitive edge.
65
Moreover, this study can also help both the policy maker and firm to be more
aware from current situation of healthy food demand and to forecast the future for these
markets. Agencies such as the Food and Drug Administration may give a better educate
to consumer about the physically activity and food intake. Agencies could help
consumers better control their consumption by educating on the appropriate serving size
and actual health content of the food product. Also, agencies may evaluate the food
manufacturers claims on the product packaging.
5.4 Discussion of Research Objectives and Hypotheses
This study set out to determine labels and packages influence consumers
perception toward healthy labelled food. This experiment aimed to examine consumers
perception on different package attributes. Conclusions in this regard are provided under
each research objective and hypothesis:
5.4.1 Nutrition Claims
Research Question 1: Is there any relationship between Nutrition Claims on the front of
the packages and consumers perception of the health benefits of the food product?
Research Objective 1: To determine whether Nutrition Claims on the front of the
packages influences consumers perception.
H1: There is a significant relationship between Nutrition Claims and customer perception
of healthy food.
According to the question number one in the questionnaire, Nutrition Claims on
the front of the packages attract minimum consumer attention when purchasing healthy
food. Because of the ambiguity of sensory experience (Deighton 1984; Ha and Hoch
1989), Nutrition Claims such as No sugar-added will misled consumers overconsuming foods. Only 37 out of 200 consumers choose healthy food by looking at
Nutrition Claims. The findings from the research showed that female more often
mentioned Nutrition Claims the first caught their attention to in arriving at a decision as
opposed to male.
66
From the results, there is significant relation between Nutrition Claims on the
front of the packages and consumers perception toward healthy food. Nutrition Claims
are potentially powerful tools in consumer communication as they allocate food
characteristic by transmit information on the front of packaging for example less sugaradded. However, Nutrition Claims are not the popular influence on consumer preference
because consumer believe Nutrition Claims also have the potential to misled food choice
that may be against their own best interests (Leathwood, Richardson, Strter, Todd, &
van Trijp, 2007).
This can conclude that healthy labelled food definitely has an influence on
consumers perception of healthy food with its Nutrition Claims. Respondents with
greater knowledge are more likely focused on real Nutrition Information instead of
Nutrition Claims (Vries, 2008). In general, it had been found that the use of Nutrition
Claims affects the purchasing behaviour mainly because the consumers want to avoid
unhealthy food products (Drichoutis et al., 2006).
5.4.2 Nutrition Information
Research Question 2: Is there any relationship between Nutrition Information on the
back of the packages and consumers perception of the health benefits of the food
product?
Research Objective 2: To investigate whether the Nutrition Information on the back of
the packages influences consumers perception.
H2: There is a not a significant relationship between Nutrition Information and customer
The findings indicate that the Nutrition Information on the back of packages is
the not a significant predictor in influencing the consumers perception on healthy food.
Overall, the result of the study that 65 of the shoppers looked for Nutrition Information
on the back of the packages to identify healthier choices, it is evidence that consumers
often rely on the information on the package when making their purchase decision. Even
though they tend to read the message on the back of packages but at the same time
67
Nutrition Claims and colour may affect their attention at the beginning. Because
Nutrition Claim is easy to understand by consumers compare to Nutrition Information
and colour is very important factor for food package design (Kuvykaite et al., 2009).
However, most of the young people and people in the higher social grades have
higher levels of understanding enable to understand the Nutrition Information on the
food labels. As a consequence, knowledge is related to how well consumers are able to
use food labels. Without the nutrition knowledge, it should note that the result do not
prove that the Nutrition Information actually did change consumers choices. Consumer
may read the Information but then reject the information when making purchase
decision (Grunert et al., 2010). A previous study in UK analysing the Nutrition
Information did change the distribution of sales in the supermarket into a more healthy
direction, and found no effect (Sacks, Rayner, & Swinburn, 2009).
5.4.3 Colour of the packages
Research Question 3: Is there any relationship between the colour of the packages and
consumers perception of the health benefits of the food product?
Research Objective 3: To understand consumers perception of food health benefits
based on the colour of the packages.
H3: There is a significant relationship between the colour of the packages and customer
The colours of the packages have significant influences consumers perception
by the way it attracts and impresses upon consumers. Previous research also found that
colour is one of the most popular factor in the design of product packaging that food
industry would focus (Ares & Deliza, 2010). This research confirms that colour of the
packages correlates on the perceived healthfulness of products. 55 out of 200 shoppers
chose shapes of the packages as their first attention attributes. Surprisingly, colour
ranked second in importance. Thus, the preference for the colour seems to be slightly
product oriented.
The result of the study demonstrated that the green colour packages perceived
more healthy than other colours. This leads to a higher perceived healthfulness. Besides
68
that, a healthy colour of the packages leads to a positive attitude, higher credibility and
higher intention to purchase (Ruumpol, 2014). In contrast, a healthy colour of the
packages also misleads a positive attitude toward unhealthy product. This can be
explained by the fact that the unhealthy packages colour such as black colour leading to
a negative thought about the product (Ruumpol, 2014). Therefore, colour of the
packages has big impact of perceive healthy food.
5.4.4 Shape of the packages
Research Question 4: Is there any relationship between the shape of the packages and
consumers perception of the health benefits of the food product?
Research Objective 4: To understand consumers perception of food health benefits
based on the shape of the packages
H4: There is a not a significant relationship between shape of the packages and customer
The results indicate that shape of the packages do not strongly influence the
perceived healthfulness, people do not necessarily associate healthfulness with packages
shape. Regardless of whether it is elongated, rounded or irregular, shapes are not
significant predictor in consumers perception toward healthy food. 43 of the shoppers
caught their first attention on shape of the packages to perceive the healthy food.
Because some consumers are used to buy particular product, therefore the preferences
about the shape are affected by the consumer repeat purchase behaviour. Therefore,
shape matter when consumers rely on traditional shapes that they are familiar with
(Silayoi & Speece, 2007).
Hypothesis relating to the influence on shape of the packages is rejected, while
concerning the influences of the colour of the packages is accepted. In this results show
that colour of the packages is dominate shape of the packages. Consumer will tend to
perceived healthfulness based on colour of the packages more than shape of packages
(Ruumpol, 2014). In conclusion, respondents did not equate shape of packages to
healthy foods.
69
5.5 Limitation of the Study

The first limitation is geographical scope. This survey was only conducted in
Malacca state. The perception and behaviour of these respondents may not be the same
for other regions. Due to the time and financial constraints, this study was limited to 200
respondents. Therefore, this survey method does not yields generalized results for the
entire population of the country.
Another limitation of this study was that limited focus group could influences on
consumers perception toward healthy food packaging. This result of the study only
focus on gender differences in their perception of packaging attributes on healthy food.
Besides, this study does not have focus on education level of participants. Levels of
education have influences on consumers perception toward healthy food packaging.
High levels of education may influences respondents choice because they possess more
nutrition knowledge compared to the lower levels of education.
Nonetheless, this research only focuses on the consumer side, about how the
healthy food packaging will influences consumers perception. However, this study did
not explore the manufacturing side of the encounter. So that, manufacturing activities
also affect the study.
5.6 Recommendation for Future Research
In this research that only examines the packaging attributes such as Nutrition
Claims, Nutrition Information, colour and shape of the packages. For the interest for
future research it could go deeper into each packages design feature to increase
understanding of consumer behaviour toward healthy food. For example, front type,
health logo, package material and graphics can be used as independent variables to
examine whether these packaging designs can affect consumers perception toward
healthy food. Most of the consumers make choices based on the packages design,
because the actual product in the packages cannot be seen (Underwood et al., 2005).
Thus, another research could examine the different packages design influence on
consumer perception in different country and culture.
70
Moreover, future research should focus more on the factors influencing the
relationship between consumer awareness and consumer purchase intention across
groups. Identifying the specific causes of consumer awareness and consumer purchase
intention on the healthy labelled food would clarify differences across groups. Besides,
extrinsic factor such as perceived price may also influences consumers purchase
intention toward healthy labelled food. This is in order to study the real attitude and
behaviour in future research.
Last but not least, future research should go deeper investigate into why and
what product features can be perceived to as healthy or unhealthy. Thus, further examine
the reasons behind consumers perception such as why consumers with a higher interest
in heath expect a higher price for an unhealthy product and why consumers expect a
higher price for certain packages.
5.7 Conclusions
For the purpose of this study, labels and packages were examined vis--vis its
perceived health benefits by consumers. These packaging attributes are Nutrition Claims,
Nutrition Information, colour and shape of the packages that influence consumers
perception toward healthy food. Consumers commonly understand the relationship
between food and health after this study. The research finding provides a better
understanding of packaging attributes and their impact on consumers perception toward
healthy food product. The results of the findings indicate that Nutrition Claims on the
front of the packages and colour of the packages are two attributes that influences
consumers perception the most.
71
Appendices
FACULTY OF BUSINESS
BACHELOR OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION
FINAL YEAR PROJECT
QUESTIONNAIRE FORM
RESEARCH TOPIC:
IN THE EYE OF THE CONSUMERS: INFLUENCE OF LABELS AND
PACKAGES ON THE CONSUMERS PERCEPTION TOWARD
HEALTHY LABELLED FOOD
Dear respondent,
This is a study conducted by Chun Jin Wee, who is a final year undergraduate student of
Bachelor of Business Administration (Hons) from Multimedia University (MMU). I am
carrying out a study concerning packaging attributes influence consumers perception.
The information you provide will help to develop a better understanding of the factors
that influence the consumers perception of the healthy labelled food. This questionnaire
consists of total 3 section question which are section 1, 2 and 3. I need your corporation
to carry out this study. The data collected will be kept confidential and used for research
purpose only. Please kindly return the questionnaire once you completed. I appreciate
the time you spend to answer and your cooperation in completing this study. Thank you.
72
Section 1: Important attributes in your daily life

1. The following diagrams show different label and packages of healthy food. What
caught your first attention?
o The colour of the packages
The shape of the package
o The Nutrition Information
The Nutrition Claims on the
on the packages
packages
2. Is it physical activity enjoyable for you?

o Never
o Sometimes
o Usually
o Always
3. How you describe your health?

o Poor
o Fair
o Good
o Very good
o Excellent
73
Section 2: Labels and Packages Influence Consumers Perception

Please answer follows to your own feelings about the labels and packages of the healthy
food. Please indicate the degree of your agreement or disagreement with each statement
by circle on the number from 1 to 5.
Nutrition Claims
1.
When I buy a food product, I always read 1

the label.
2.
The Nutrition Claims for organic and 1

less sugar is chaotic.
3.
By reading food labels on packages I can 1

easily choose the healthy foods.
4.
Attractive Nutrition Claims on the food 1

labels can make me willing to try.
5.
The information in the label is difficult to 1

understand.
6.
The information on healthy foods is 1

truthful.
7.
I read the nutrition information before 1

buying a healthy food product.
8.
I am not interested in the nutritional 1

attributes of the food products that I eat.
9.
Nutritional Information is written in too 1

small letters.
74
Agree
Strongly
food
Agree
consumers perception toward healthy
Neutral
influence
Disagree
packages
Disagree
and
Strongly
No. Labels
Colour
10.
Red colour and black colour food 1
packaging normally will be perceived

less healthy.
11.
Green colour package perceived more 1

healthy food than other colour.
12.
Rating of tastiness of healthy food by 1

looking at the package colour.
13.
Packaging colour will influence me to 1

purchase the food product.
14.
Packaging colour will grab my attention.
15.
Colour of the product has a great 1
the 1
The shape of a food product affects my 1

Shape
16.
I perceive the healthy food by looking at 1

the packages shape.
17.
Elongated shapes will be perceived as 1

more healthy than a round shape
packages.
18.
Influence
of
the
shape
on
healthfulness of the food choices.

19.
buying decision.
20.
Shape of the product has a great 1

Consumer perception
21.
When I like the food, I will buy it 1

without too much deliberation.
22.
Healthy is the important element that 1
75
influences my food choices.

23.
I am willing to pay more expensive in 1
order to choose my healthier option.

24.
Healthy claims on the package will 1

influence more my perception on healthy
food than the design is less healthy.
25.
I have healthy dietary habits
Section 3: Demographic Information

Please tick () in the appropriate answer.
1. Gender
o Male
o Female
2. Age
o 18-30
o 31-45
o 46-60
o 60 above
3. Marital status
o Single
o Married
4. Monthly family income

o Less than Rm 1000
o Rm 1000 Rm 2000
o More than Rm 2000
76
References
Al-shaaban, S., & Nguyen, T. B. (2014). Consumer Attitude and Purchase Intention
towards Organic Food A quantitative study of China Linnus University.
Ampuero, O., & Vila, N. (2006). Consumer perceptions of product packaging. Journal
of Consumer Marketing, 23(2), 100112.
http://doi.org/10.1108/07363760610655032
Ares, G., & Deliza, R. (2010). Studying the influence of package shape and colour on
consumer expectations of milk desserts using word association and conjoint
analysis. Food Quality and Preference, 21(8), 930937.
http://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2010.03.006
Azman, N., & Sahak, S. Z. (2014). Nutritional Label and Consumer Buying Decision: A
Preliminary Review. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 130(INCOMaR
2013), 490498. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.04.057
Bassett, R., Chapman, G. E., & Beagan, B. L. (2008). Autonomy and control: The coconstruction of adolescent food choice. Appetite, 50(2-3), 325332.
http://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2007.08.009
Beauprez, C. (2010). Consumer behavior and buying profile in the Wooden Housing
Industry in France . Consumer behavior and buying profile in the Wooden Housing
Industry in France, (August), 170.
Bhat, Z. F., & Bhat, H. (2011). Milk and Dairy Products as Functional Foods: A Review.
International Journal of Dairy Science. http://doi.org/10.3923/ijds.2011.1.12
Blackwell, R. D., Miniard, P. W., & Engel, J. F. (2006). Consumer Behavior.
Thomson/South-Western.
Bryman, A. (2008). Getting started: Reviewing the Literature. Oxford University Press,
USA, 748.
Bryman, & Bell, E. (2007). Business Research Methods. Oxford University Press.
Budesa, T., Egnor, E., & Howell, L. (1994). Gender Influence on Perceptions of Healthy
77
and Unhealthy Lifestyles Tracy Budesa, Erin Egnor, and Lauren Howell Faculty
Sponsor: Dr. Linda Foley.
Caillies, S., Denhire, G., & Kintsch, W. (2002). The effect of prior knowledge on
understanding from text: Evidence from primed recognition. European Journal of
Cognitive Psychology, 14(2), 267286. http://doi.org/10.1080/09541440143000069
Chang, H.-S., & Zepeda, L. (2005). Consumer perceptions and demand for organic food
in Australia: Focus group discussions. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems.
http://doi.org/10.1079/RAF2004103
Clement, J., Kristensen, T., & Grnhaug, K. (2013). Understanding consumers in-store
visual perception: The influence of package design features on visual attention.
Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 20(2), 234239.
http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2013.01.003
Coulson, N. S. (2000). An application of the stages of change model to consumer use of
food labelsnull. British Food Journal, 102(9), 661668.
http://doi.org/10.1108/00070700010362031
Cowburn, G., & Stockley, L. (2005). Consumer understanding and use of nutrition
labelling: a systematic review. Public Health Nutrition, 8(1), 2128.
http://doi.org/10.1079/PHN2005666
Davis, D. (2005). Business Research for Decision Making Sixth Edition.
Drichoutis, a C., Drichoutis, a. C., Lazaridis, P., Lazaridis, P., Nayga, R. M., & Nayga,
R. (2006). Consumers use of nutritional labels: a review of research studies and
issues. Academy of Marketing Science Review, 9(9), 122.
Ellis, N., Fitchett, J., Higgins, M., Jack, G., Lim, M., Saren, M., & Tadajewski, M.
(2010). Introducing the History of Marketing Theory. Marketing: A Critical
Textbook, 1333.
Enax, L., Weber, B., Ahlers, M., Kaiser, U., Diethelm, K., Holtkamp, D., Kersting, M.
(2015). Food packaging cues influence taste perception and increase effort
provision for a recommended snack product in children. Frontiers in Psychology,
78
6(July), 111. http://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00882

Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Buchner, A., & Lang, A.-G. (2009). Statistical power analyses
using G*Power 3.1: tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior
Research Methods, 41(4), 11491160. http://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.41.4.1149
Freytag-leyer, B., Socio-ecology, P., & Households, P. (2015). CONSUMERS
INTENTION AND PERCEPTION OF BUYING ORGANIC FOOD PRODUCTS
IN JAKARTA , INDONESIA, (April), 5663.
Ghauri, P. N., & Grnhaug, K. (2005). Research Methods in Business Studies: A
Practical Guide. Financial Times Prentice Hall.
Grimes, A., & Doole, I. (1998). Exploring the Relationships Between Colour and
International Branding: A Cross Cultural Comparison of the UK and Taiwan.
Journal of Marketing Management, 14(7), 799817.
http://doi.org/10.1362/026725798784867581
Grossman, R. P., & Wisenblit, J. Z. (1999). What we know about consumers color
choices. Journal of Marketing Practice: Applied Marketing Science, 5(3), 7888.
http://doi.org/10.1108/EUM0000000004565
Grunert, K. G., Wills, J. M., & Fernndez-Celemn, L. (2010). Nutrition knowledge, and
use and understanding of nutrition information on food labels among consumers in
the UK. Appetite, 55(2), 177189. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2010.05.045
Guerra, E., de Lara, J., Malizia, A., & Daz, P. (2009). Supporting user-oriented analysis
for multi-view domain-specific visual languages. Information and Software
Technology. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2008.09.005
Hankins, M., French, D., & Horne, R. (2000). Statistical guidelines for studies of the
theory of reasoned action and the theory of planned behaviour. Psychology &
Health. http://doi.org/10.1080/08870440008400297
Hausman, A. (2000). A multimethod investigation of consumer motivations in impulse
buying behaviornull. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 17(5), 403426.
http://doi.org/10.1108/07363760010341045
79
Hayes. (1998). Association for Contextual Behavioral Science. Retrieved from

http://contextualscience.org/hayes_strosahl_wilson_1999
Hieke, S., Kuljanic, N., Wills, J. M., Pravst, I., Kaur, a., Raats, M. M., Grunert, K. G.
(2015). The role of health-related claims and health-related symbols in consumer
behaviour: Design and conceptual framework of the CLYMBOL project and initial
results. Nutrition Bulletin, 40(1), 6672. http://doi.org/10.1111/nbu.12128
Howard, P. H., & Allen, P. (2006). Beyond organic: consumer interest in new labelling
schemes in the Central Coast of California. International Journal of Consumer
Studies, 30(5), 439451. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1470-6431.2006.00536.x
Imram, N. (1999). The role of visual cues in consumer perception and acceptance of a
food productnull. Nutrition & Food Science, 99(5), 224230.
http://doi.org/10.1108/00346659910277650
Kelley, P. G., Bresee, J., Cranor, L. F., & Reeder, R. W. (2009). A nutrition label for
privacy. Proceedings of the 5th Symposium on Usable Privacy and Security SOUPS
09, 1990, 1. http://doi.org/10.1145/1572532.1572538
Kollat, D. T., Blackwell, R. D., & Engel, J. F. (1972). The Current Status of Consumer
Behavior Research: Developments During the 1968-1972 Period . SV - Proceedings
of the Third Annual Conference of the Association for Consumer Research.
Retrieved from http://www.acrwebsite.org/search/view-conferenceproceedings.aspx?Id=12031
Kuvykaite, R., Dovaliene, A., & Navickiene, L. (2009). Impact of package elements on
consumers purchase decision. Economics and Management, 14, 441447.
Leathwood, P. D., Richardson, D. P., Strter, P., Todd, P. M., & van Trijp, H. C. M.
(2007). Consumer understanding of nutrition and health claims: sources of evidence.
The British Journal of Nutrition, 98(3), 474484.
http://doi.org/10.1017/S000711450778697X
Malhotra, N. K., & Birks, D. F. (2003). Marketing Research: An Applied Approach.
Financial Times/Prentice Hall.
80
Marshall, D., Stuart, M., & Bell, R. (2006). Examining the relationship between product
package colour and product selection in preschoolers. Food Quality and Preference,
17(7-8), 615621. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2006.05.007
Miller, L. M. S., & Cassady, D. L. (2015). The effects of nutrition knowledge on food
label use. A review of the literature. Appetite, 92, 207216.
http://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2015.05.029
Milner, T., & Rosenstreich, D. (2013). A review of consumer decision-making models
and development of a new model for financial services. Journal of Financial
Services Marketing, 18(2), 106120. http://doi.org/10.1057/fsm.2013.7
Moriarty, S. E. (1986). Creative advertising: theory and practice. Englewood Cliffs,
N.J.: Prentice-Hall.
Moskowitz, T. J., Ooi, Y. H., & Pedersen, L. H. (2012). Time series momentum. Journal
of Financial Economics, 104(2), 228250.
http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfineco.2011.11.003
Munro, E. (2005). A systems approach to investigating child abuse deaths. LSE
Research Online. Retrieved from http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/2666
Naujokas, M. F., Anderson, B., Ahsan, H., Vasken Aposhian, H., Graziano, J. H.,
Thompson, C., & Suk, W. a. (2013). The broad scope of health effects from chronic
arsenic exposure: Update on a worldwide public health problem. Environmental
Health Perspectives, 121(3), 295302. http://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1205875
Oliver, R., & Westbrook, R. (1982). The factor structure of satisfaction and related
postpurchase measures. New Findings on Consumer Satisfaction and . Retrieved
from http://lilt.ilstu.edu/staylor/csdcb/articles/1980/Oliver et al 1980.pdf
Ollberding, N. J., Wolf, R. L., & Contento, I. (2010). Food Label Use and Its Relation to
Dietary Intake among US Adults. Journal of the American Dietetic Association,
110(8), 12331237. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jada.2010.05.007
Pallant. (2001). Spss survival manual. PSS SURVIVAL MANUAL.
81
Piqueras-Fiszman, B., Alcaide, J., Roura, E., & Spence, C. (2012). Is it the plate or is it
the food? Assessing the influence of the color (black or white) and shape of the
plate on the perception of the food placed on it. Food Quality and Preference, 24(1),
205208. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2011.08.011
Plassmann, H., & Weber, B. (2015). Individual Differences in Marketing Placebo
Effects: Evidence from Brain Imaging and Behavioral Experiments. Journal of
Marketing Research, 52(4), 493510. http://doi.org/10.1509/jmr.13.0613
Plotnik, Y., Rechtsman, M. C., Song, D., Heinrich, M., Zeuner, J. M., Nolte, S.,
Segev, M. (2014). Observation of unconventional edge states in photonic
graphene. Nat Mater, 13(1), 5762. Retrieved from
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nmat3783
Proper, K., & Mechelen, W. Van. (2007). Effectiveness and economic impact of
worksite interventions to promote physical activity and healthy diet. World Health
Organization, 163.
Raghunathan, R., Naylor, R. W., & Hoyer, W. D. (2006). The Unhealthy = Tasty
Intuition and Its Effects on Taste Inferences, Enjoyment, and Choice of Food
Products. Journal of Marketing, 70(4), 170184.
http://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.70.4.170
Report, P. I. (2010). Examination of Nutrition Rating Systems and Symbols, (October).
Rijswijk, W. Van, & Frewer, L. J. (2008). Consumer perceptions of food quality and
safety and their relation to traceability. British Food Journal, 110(10), 10341046.
http://doi.org/10.1108/00070700810906642
Ross, B. H., & Murphy, G. L. (1999). Food for thought: cross-classification and
category organization in a complex real-world domain. Cognitive Psychology,
38(4), 495553. http://doi.org/10.1006/cogp.1998.0712
Ruumpol, I. (2014). In the eye of the consumer: The influence of package shape and
package color on perceived product healthfulness, (September).
Sacks, G., Rayner, M., & Swinburn, B. (2009). Impact of front-of-pack traffic-light
82
nutrition labelling on consumer food purchases in the UK. Health Promotion

International, 24(4), 344352. http://doi.org/10.1093/heapro/dap032
Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2009). Research Methods for Business
Students. Research methods for business students.
Sekaran. (2002). (4th Edition) -Research Methods for Business_ a Skill Building
Approach-Wiley.
Shiv, B., Carmon, Z. I. V, & Ariely, D. A. N. (2005).
jmkr%2E2005%2E42%2E4%2E383, XLII(November), 383393.
Silayoi, P., & Speece, M. (2004). Packaging and purchase decisions: An exploratory
study on the impact of involvement level and time pressure. British Food Journal,
106(8), 607628. http://doi.org/10.1108/00070700410553602
Silayoi, P., & Speece, M. (2007). The importance of packaging attributes: a conjoint
analysis approach. European Journal of Marketing, 41(11/12), 14951517.
http://doi.org/10.1108/03090560710821279
Silverglade, B., & Ringel Heller, I. (2010). Food Labeling Chaos. Retrieved from
www.cspinet.org
Steptoe, a, Pollard, T. M., & Wardle, J. (1995). Development of a measure of the
motives underlying the selection of food: the food choice questionnaire. Appetite,
25(3), 267284. http://doi.org/10.1006/appe.1995.0061
Tarabella, A., & Voinea, L. (2013). Advantages and limitations of the front-of-package
(FOP) labeling systems in guiding the consumers healthy food choice. Amfiteatru
Economic, 15(33), 198209.
Thomas Sioutis. (2011). Department of Marketing and Statistics E FFECTS OF P
ACKAGE D ESIGN ON C ONSUMER E XPECTATIONS Author: Thomas
Sioutis Advisor: Joachim Scholderer, (July).
Underwood, G. J. C., Perkins, R. G., Consalvey, M. C., Hanlon, a. R. M., Oxborough,
K., Baker, N. R., & Paterson, D. M. (2005). Patterns in microphytobenthic primary
83
productivity: Species-specific variation in migratory rhythms and photosynthesis

efficiency in mixed-species biofilms, 50(3), 755767.
http://doi.org/10.4319/lo.2005.50.3.0755
Underwood, R. L., Klein, N. M., & Burke, R. R. (2001). Packaging communication:
attentional effects of product imagery. Journal of Product & Brand Management.
http://doi.org/10.1108/10610420110410531
Vries, F. de. (2008). The influence of health ability on consumers perception of
products with a health recommendation and products with a health claim.
Wallen, N. E., & Fraenkel, J. R. (2001). Educational Research: A Guide to the Process.
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Wansink, B. (1996). Can Package Size Accelerate Usage Volume? Journal of Marketing.
http://doi.org/10.2307/1251838
Watson, W. L., Chapman, K., King, L., Kelly, B., Hughes, C., Yu Louie, J. C., Gill,
T. P. (2012). How well do Australian shoppers understand energy terms on food
labels? Public Health Nutrition, 16(3), 19.
http://doi.org/10.1017/S1368980012000900
Zikmund. (2003). Business research methods a study guide.pdf. Thomson/South-W
estern, Cincinnati, Ohio.
84

FYP Example PDF

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

FYP Example PDF

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

IN THE EYE OF THE CONSUMERS:

INFLUENCE OF LABELS AND

CHUN JIN WEE

IN THE EYE OF THE CONSUMERS:

A research project submitted in partial

CHUN JIN WEE INFLUENCE ON LABELS AND PACKAGES

BBA FEB 2016

2016 Universiti Telekom Sdn. Bhd. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

Copyright of this report belongs to Universiti Telekom Sdn. Bhd. as

This thesis is dedicated to my parents.

Chapter 1 Introduction .................................................................................................... 1

2.5.2 Nutrition Information .......................................................................................... 15

4.3 Mean Analysis ............................................................................................................ 44

Definition of key terms

Conjoint analysis result (part-worth utilities and relative 22

Summary of Demographic Characteristics

Summary of Important Attributes in Daily Life

Mean and standard deviation for the labels and packages of

Correlation between packaging design and consumers

Rule of thumbs of correlation analysis

Summary of Reliability Analysis Result

Multiple Linear Regressions

Summary of Hypothesis Testing Results

Nutrition Claims and Nutrition Information

Skippy Peanut Butter Nutrition Information

Theory of Consumer Decision Process (CDP)

Theory of Total Food Quality Model (TFQM)

Nature Valley snack bar

Understand and use the Nutrition Information

Different color of packaging influence customers

Healthy biscuit shaped package based on consumers

Interactions between outcome dimension, claim strength,

and claim concreteness on perceived healthfulness, sensory

Sample of experimental stimuli

Proposed Research Framework

Central and non-central distributions

X-Y plot for a range of value

Five-point Likert scale

Marital Status of Respondents

Monthly Family Income

Different labels and packages of healthy food

Overall Health Status

Normal P-P Plot Regression Standardized Residual

2016 Universiti Telekom Sdn. Bhd. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

Copyright of this report belongs to Universiti Telekom Sdn. Bhd. as

This thesis is dedicated to my parents.

2.6 Previous Studies ......................................................................................................... 19

4.8 Summary .................................................................................................................... 53

Definition of key terms

Conjoint analysis result (part-worth utilities and relative 22

Summary of Demographic Characteristics

Summary of Important Attributes in Daily Life

Mean and standard deviation for the labels and packages of

Correlation between packaging design and consumers

Rule of thumbs of correlation analysis

Summary of Reliability Analysis Result

Multiple Linear Regressions

Summary of Hypothesis Testing Results

Cross Tabulation of different label and packages of healthy 53

Nutrition Claims and Nutrition Information

Skippy Peanut Butter Nutrition Information

Theory of Consumer Decision Process (CDP)

Theory of Total Food Quality Model (TFQM)