Packaging: Purchase Decision and Value Perception Analysis between Men and Women

Isabelle Benevides Monteiro; Leonardo Carlim

DOI: 10.22167/2675-6528-202603011

Article derived from a Final Course Work (TCC), with content based on the student’s original work and adapted to the editorial format of the E&S Magazine with the support of the ResumeAI tool, an artificial intelligence solution developed by Instituto Pecege for textual synthesis and organization.

Abstract

The packaging acts as an extension of the brand at the point of sale, conveying messages of value, quality, and identity that influence consumer perception and purchasing decisions. The study investigated consumer perception of the role of packaging in value generation and purchase decisions, considering gender differences in criteria. A quantitative and qualitative approach was adopted, with a structured questionnaire applied to 260 Brazilian respondents over 18 years of age, comprising 130 men and 130 women, between January and February 2026. The instrument used Likert scales to evaluate visual, functional, symbolic, emotional, and sustainability-related attributes of packaging. The results showed distinct patterns between genders: women associated value with symbolic, emotional, and informational attributes, while men prioritized functional attributes, such as practicality and durability. Packaging proved relevant in contexts of uncertainty and price equivalence, acting as a decision criterion for both groups. A misalignment was also observed between the declared valuation of sustainability and the actual willingness to pay for sustainable products. It was concluded that packaging constitutes a strategic element in value construction and in guiding purchase decisions, reinforcing the importance of considering perception differences between consumer profiles.

Keywords: Consumer behavior; Purchase decision; Packaging; Gender; Value perception.

1. Introduction

Packaging plays an essential role in the interface between the product and the consumer. In addition to protecting and preserving the content, they function as an extension of the brand at the point of sale, conveying messages of value, identity, and quality. These attributes, along with emotional aspects, are crucial for consumer perception (Harun & Moury, 2019). The aesthetics, functionality, and sustainability of packaging are increasingly valued, reflecting consumers’ search for purchasing experiences aligned with their preferences and values (Bara et al., 2021).

Considering the multiplicity of packaging functions, it becomes fundamental for companies to understand which attributes most attract the consumer in a highly competitive market. Elements such as attractive design, ease of use, and innovation are decisive in capturing the public’s attention and influencing purchasing decisions (Hasibuan & Nuraeni, 2023). Choices related to the development of packaging and labels directly impact a product’s success, shaping the perception of value and brand positioning strategies (Pride & Ferrel, 2016).

Packaging has transcended its merely protective function to assume a strategic role in communication and in building the product’s perceived value. At the point of sale, it acts as a powerful visual stimulus, capable of attracting attention, arousing interest, and influencing purchase intention, often replacing direct interaction with a salesperson (Stefano, 2012). This strategic role is manifested through symbolic and emotional elements, such as colors, shape, typography, and information organization, which can generate beliefs, emotions, and inferences about product quality (Garrán, 2006). Visual and functional attributes directly influence the purchase decision, increasing attractiveness and facilitating information comprehension, reinforcing brand identity (Borges et al., 2017).

The influence of packaging on the purchase decision is not limited to its ability to attract attention. It also lies in how information and visual elements are used in product evaluation. In scenarios with limited information about a brand or product, packaging serves as a source of cues, aiding in the formation of expectations about quality, functionality, and value. Thus, characteristics such as design, information organization, materials, shape, and graphic elements contribute to reducing uncertainty and guiding the choice among available alternatives (Underwood & Klein, 2002; Silayoi & Speece, 2007).

This relevance is amplified in situations of comparison between similar products. When alternatives present similar functional characteristics or equivalent prices, the elements communicated by the packaging gain greater importance as differentiation criteria. The packaging can then function as a tie-breaker, allowing the consumer to establish preferences based on attributes that go beyond the intrinsic characteristics of the product, such as perception of quality, brand identification, practicality, and clarity of information (Silayoi & Speece, 2007).

However, the purchase decision is a multifaceted process, influenced by several factors beyond packaging, such as product characteristics, price, brand familiarity, individual needs, and the purchase context. Packaging, in this process, is one of the stimuli present in the decision environment, and its weight can vary depending on the situation. Understanding which packaging attributes are valued and how they relate to perceived value and product choice is crucial for consumer behavior and for the development of effective marketing strategies.

The influence of packaging is not uniform among consumers. Men and women, for example, tend to react differently to visual, emotional, and functional stimuli, suggesting that design can play different roles in building perceived value (Kemp & Kopp, 2011; Milner & Fodness, 2018). In the Brazilian context, this discussion is particularly relevant due to the strong female participation in purchasing decisions. Furthermore, demographic characteristics such as age, income, and education level also modulate the interpretation of packaging stimuli, affecting the perception of value, brand trust, and purchase intention (Oliveira, 2022; Paiva et al., 2024).

Although several variables can influence packaging perception, this study chose to restrict its comparative analysis to the gender variable. This choice is justified by the relevance of gender in Brazilian purchasing behavior and by the gap in national research addressing the topic from this perspective. This methodological delimitation allowed for an in-depth analysis, without disregarding the influence of other variables, which are recognized as complementary factors in the discussion of results. Thus, deepening the understanding of how men and women perceive and react to packaging is fundamental to optimizing marketing and communication strategies.

Given this scenario, the present research is justified by the need to fill the knowledge gap regarding the differences in value perception and purchase decision between genders in the context of packaging in Brazil. The objective of this study was to investigate consumer perception of the role of packaging in value generation and purchase decision, considering the differences in criteria between men and women.

2. Material and Methods

The present study was characterized as a research of an exploratory and descriptive nature, according to the classifications of Gil (2008). A mixed methodological approach was adopted, combining qualitative and quantitative elements, in line with the guidelines of Malhotra (2012). This choice aimed to provide a comprehensive understanding of the influence of packaging on purchasing decisions, focusing on the differentiated perceptions between men and women, aligning with the central objective of the investigation.

The investigation was structured in two main stages. Initially, a survey of the theoretical framework was carried out, which included a review of books, scientific articles, and market reports. This phase focused on topics such as packaging design, consumer behavior, value perception, and the influence of gender on purchasing decisions. The objective was to theoretically ground the analysis and define the variables pertinent to the study.

The second stage consisted of field research, which involved the application of a structured questionnaire. The sample was non-probabilistic by convenience, totaling 260 Brazilian participants, all over 18 years of age. To ensure the consistency of comparative analyses, the sample was composed of 130 men and 130 women. Numerical equivalence between genders was established as a selection criterion, disregarding new responses from a group once its quota was reached, until the other group also completed it.

The questionnaire was developed based on classic and contemporary studies on consumer behavior, including the contributions of Solomon (2018) and Meyers-Levy and Loken (2015). These authors address gender differences in information processing, value perception, and response to visual and emotional stimuli. The instrument contained closed-ended questions, such as multiple choice and binary responses, and an open-ended question, to capture spontaneous perceptions.

The issues regarding packaging attributes were evaluated using a five-point Likert scale, where 1 represented “Strongly disagree” and 5, “Strongly agree”. The instrument addressed visual attributes, such as colors and design; functional attributes, such as practicality and format; and symbolic-emotional attributes, such as emotions and brand trust. Sustainability and willingness to pay aspects were also included, following Silayoi and Speece’s (2007) classification of visual and informational elements.

Data collection occurred online, using the Google Forms tool, between January 12, 2026, and February 1, 2026. The questionnaire was distributed through digital platforms and social media, with a request for sharing among participants’ contacts. This method allowed reaching a significant number of respondents in a concentrated period. Throughout the entire process, anonymity and confidentiality of the responses were ensured, in accordance with the ethical principles of academic research.

For the data analysis, a comparative approach was used between gender groups, focusing on the assignment of value to different elements of the packaging. The responses obtained on the Likert scales were processed to identify patterns and differences in perception averages between men and women. Additionally, a qualitative analysis of the open-ended responses was performed, seeking to identify elements of the packaging that most caught the participants’ attention and the spontaneous justifications for their perceptions.

3. Results and Discussion

This section details the research findings on consumer perception of the role of packaging in value generation and purchase decisions, focusing on distinctions between men and women. The results revealed consistent patterns of attribute valuation, indicating that packaging transcends its protective function to establish itself as a strategic element in brand communication and in guiding consumer choices. The comparative analysis between genders, along with the observation of variables such as age and income, allowed for an in-depth understanding of the mechanisms by which packaging influences purchasing behavior in the Brazilian context.

The profile of the survey respondents was predominantly composed of individuals aged between 25 and 34 years, residing in large urban centers. The majority had higher education or postgraduate degrees and a monthly individual income ranging between R$2,000.00 and R$7,000.00. These participants stated that they made purchases one to three times a month, mainly in physical stores, and identified themselves as co-responsible for domestic purchases. The product categories most frequently selected for the questionnaire were food and beverages, followed by personal hygiene. This demographic profile suggests a sample with a higher level of education and urban insertion, which was considered in the interpretation of the results, especially regarding the valuation of informational attributes and the perception of sustainability.

Packaging as a Value Generator

The analysis of perceived value generation by packaging, based on visual, functional, and symbolic-emotional attributes, revealed distinct patterns between genders. Women attributed the highest averages to symbolic and emotional attributes. They systematically scored higher on statements that packaging contributes to image, trust, and identification with brand values. For the female audience, packaging functions as a communication vehicle for the brand’s proposal, capable of evoking positive emotions, reinforcing credibility, and increasing the product’s perceived value. This behavior aligns with holistic information processing, as described by Meyers-Levy and Loken (2015), where visual, symbolic, and emotional stimuli are integrated for a global product assessment.

In contrast, value generation among men focused on functional attributes. Issues related to format, ease of handling, durability, practicality, and clarity of functional information obtained higher averages for the male audience compared to the female. For a significant portion of men, packaging is evaluated as an extension of the product’s utility, needing to facilitate use, protect the content, and communicate objectivity. This response pattern corroborates Solomon’s (2018) selective processing model, which emphasizes the prioritization of instrumental attributes by male consumers in product evaluation.

The comparative analysis of the means by packaging dimension between men and women revealed that, for visual attributes, women presented a mean of 4.21, while men registered 4.10. For functional attributes, women obtained a mean of 4.03, and men, 3.91. For symbolic-emotional attributes, women reached 4.38, and men, 4.13. These data, although with some nuances, reinforce the literature indicating that packaging attributes are not perceived homogeneously, and that value generation can follow different paths depending on the consumer profile (Meyers-Levy & Loken, 2015; Solomon, 2018).

A cross-sectional analysis by age group revealed additional patterns. Respondents between 18 and 24 years old, regardless of gender, tended to score higher on visual attributes, indicating greater aesthetic sensitivity and a more pronounced influence of visual appeal on perceived value formation. On the other hand, participants between 35 and 54 years old showed a greater weight attributed to functional information and brand trust. This trend suggests a maturity in the decision-making process in older age groups, where packaging is evaluated more for the utility and credibility it conveys than for immediate aesthetic appeal.

Income level also proved to be a relevant variable in value perception. Respondents with individual income above R$ 7,000 showed greater agreement with the statement that packaging makes the product appear more valuable and contributes to brand trust. For this group, quality design acts as a credibility signal. In contrast, among lower-income respondents, the weight of packaging in value perception was more modest, with greater variance in responses, indicating that price still acts as the main criterion in this market segment.

The variation of the symbolic-emotional index by age group and gender showed that women maintained higher averages in all age groups, with peaks for both genders in the 25 to 34 years range. Specifically, for women, the averages were 4.39 (18-24 years), 4.45 (25-34 years), 4.20 (35-44 years), 4.00 (45-54 years), and 5.00 (55+ years). For men, the averages were 4.27 (18-24 years), 4.31 (25-34 years), 4.11 (35-44 years), and 3.56 (45-54 years), with an asterisk indicating fewer than five respondents in the 55+ range for men. This data reinforces the complexity of value perception, which is modulated by multiple variables beyond gender.

Packaging as a Decisive Factor in Purchase

The analysis of issues directly related to the purchase decision revealed that, for over 90% of participants, packaging influences choice, regardless of gender. However, the mechanism of this influence differs significantly between groups. The statement that packaging influences the choice between similar products from different brands obtained high agreement in both groups, with a slight advantage for women. The qualitative analysis of open-ended responses corroborated this pattern, showing that women often describe the experience of being attracted by packaging before needing the product, converting visual appeal into unplanned purchase intent. Men, on the other hand, tend to describe packaging as a rational comparison factor, especially when evaluating practicality or clarity of information without prior knowledge of the brand.

The question about the willingness to pay more for a better-designed packaging revealed a dissociation between the perception of value and the actual purchasing behavior. Although the packaging increased the perception of value for most respondents, this did not translate into a proportionally higher willingness to pay. Among women, a more pronounced tendency was observed to associate the acceptance of a higher price with the perception of premium quality, sophisticated aesthetics, and alignment with sustainability values. Among men, on the other hand, additional payment was more frequently justified by the superior durability and functionality of the packaging.

The assertion that, even without knowing the brand, packaging can be decisive in the choice obtained high agreement for both genders, confirming its role as a cognitive shortcut in decision-making, as described by Silayoi and Speece (2007). In the scenario of price equivalence between products, the influence of packaging is further enhanced, acting as a tie-breaker. In this context, the female audience tends to decide based on aesthetic attributes and identification with the brand’s values, while the male audience guides their choice by clearly communicated practicality and functionality attributes.

The comparative results of agreement with the decisiveness of packaging in contexts of uncertainty showed that, for the statement “Even without knowing the brand, packaging can be decisive in my choice” (Q33), women presented a Likert average of 3.73, while men registered 3.57. For the statement “Even when the price is similar, packaging can be decisive in my choice” (Q34), the averages were 3.98 for women and 3.90 for men. The variation in the average between the two scenarios was +0.17 for women and +0.41 for men, indicating that the perception of packaging decisiveness increases more significantly for men in situations of price equivalence.

This finding is in line with Underwood and Klein (2002) and Silayoi and Speece (2007), who highlight packaging as a source of information and cues to assist consumers in product evaluation, especially in situations of limited information or price equivalence. The data from this research reinforce this perspective, showing that packaging gains greater relevance in contexts of uncertainty and price equivalence. However, the results also add a dimension to what is presented in the literature, demonstrating that tie-breaking criteria vary between genders, with women valuing aesthetic and informative attributes linked to brand identity more, and men prioritizing practicality and functionality.

An additional pattern emerged when crossing the role of packaging in the purchase decision with the place of purchase. Among respondents who predominantly shop online, packaging maintained its relevance, being evaluated through images and ad descriptions. In this channel, the packaging’s ability to visually communicate quality and brand identity, even before physical contact, becomes even more critical. This is particularly true for the female audience, who demonstrated greater sensitivity to aesthetic and informative elements even in the digital environment, reinforcing the importance of effective visual communication across all sales channels.

Sustainability: Declared Intention and Effective Behavior

The issues surrounding sustainability revealed one of the study’s most relevant findings: a misalignment between declared intention and actual behavior. The vast majority of respondents stated that the use of environmentally responsible materials is important and affirmed that information about sustainability increases their confidence in the product and brand. However, the averages dropped significantly when the question moved from stating importance to willingness to pay more for sustainable products, indicating that price still prevails over environmental intention at the moment of purchase.

This pattern was observed for both genders, but with relevant nuances. Women showed greater agreement regarding the importance of environmental aspects, with an average of 3.69, compared to 3.52 for men, assigning more symbolic value to sustainability as a brand attribute. However, both genders exhibited a similar retraction when questioned about the willingness to pay more, with averages of 2.81 for women and 2.53 for men. This suggests that sustainability operates as a tie-breaker criterion, being valued when it does not imply perceived additional cost, but losing priority when it directly competes with price.

The misalignment between the importance attributed to sustainability (Q27) and the effective willingness to pay for sustainable products (Q30) was evident. For women, the average importance was 3.69 and the willingness to pay was 2.81, resulting in a gap of 0.88. For men, the average importance was 3.52 and the willingness to pay was 2.53, with a gap of 0.99. This result indicates that, although environmental concern may contribute to the formation of symbolic value and to the positive brand evaluation, this contribution finds limits when it translates into an additional perceived cost, not necessarily converting into effective purchasing behavior.

The results related to sustainability reveal a partially convergent relationship with the literature on consumer behavior and perceived value. Although participants demonstrated recognition of the importance of environmentally responsible materials and positively associated them with product and brand trust, this valuation did not translate, in the same proportion, into a willingness to pay more. For marketing professionals, this finding indicates that communicating sustainability without associating it with the perception of a cost premium is a critical factor in packaging development, as price still outweighs environmental intention at the point of purchase.

Synthesis of Findings and Recommendations

The research findings converge on two central axes: value generation and purchase decision. In both axes, gender emerged as a relevant explanatory variable, although it is not the sole determining factor, as age, income, and purchase context also introduce additional layers of complexity in the relationship between consumer and packaging. For visual value generation, women demonstrated high appreciation for colors, design, and aesthetics, perceiving the packaging as an extension of the brand’s identity. Men, in turn, showed moderate appreciation, with design being relevant when associated with legibility.

Regarding the generation of functional value, women considered practicality important, but with lower priority compared to symbolic attributes. For men, practicality, format, ease of use, and durability were the main value drivers. As for the generation of symbolic and emotional value, it was more pronounced among women, who associated the packaging with trust, brand identification, and premium perception. Men also recognized the packaging’s contribution to brand image, but with less emotional weight.

In the purchase decision in a context of uncertainty, both genders showed high agreement that packaging compensates for the lack of brand familiarity. However, in situations of price tie-breaking, women were inclined by aesthetic and informative attributes, while men prioritized superior functional attributes. The willingness to pay more for better-elaborated packaging was higher among women when aesthetics and sustainability were associated, and among men when durability and functionality justified the additional cost.

Regarding sustainability, both genders showed high declared intention but a significantly lower effective willingness to pay, indicating that price still overrides environmental intention. The cross-sectional profile of respondents between 25 and 34 years old revealed a rational and analytical behavior, demanding clarity, practicality, and good cost-benefit ratio, a pattern that was maintained for men and women, focusing on clear functional information and packaging efficiency.

Based on these findings, practical recommendations were developed for marketing professionals. For the female audience, in terms of visual value, it is suggested to invest in a color palette consistent with the brand’s values, elegant typography, and finishes that convey care and identity. For functional value, ensure easy opening and formats that facilitate storage, reinforcing trust in the brand. For symbolic value, clearly communicate the brand’s values on the packaging (sustainability, origin, purpose) and ensure that premium packaging impacts the perception of quality.

For the male audience, in visual value, it is crucial to prioritize visual clarity and legibility, with a clean and modern design that does not compromise the reading of information. In functional value, the ergonomic format, intuitive opening, and secure closing are decisive differentials. In symbolic value, coherence between the product’s proposal and the packaging must be maintained, avoiding an excess of decorative elements without practical function. For both audiences, in the purchase decision in a context of uncertainty, the packaging must communicate positioning and value proposition with clarity, substituting the absence of recommendation, and functional and usage information must be visible and accessible, reducing doubts about the product’s utility.

In situations of price tie, for women, differentiated aesthetics and informative attributes (ingredients, origin, differentials) sway the decision. For men, superior functionality or more practical packaging sways the decision, and value for money should be implicit in the design. Regarding sustainability, for both profiles, the recommended practice is to communicate environmental responsibility visibly, but without increasing the perception of extra cost, valuing seals and recycled materials. Packaging with excessive text, confusing information, materials that convey low quality, or that hinder opening/storage should be avoided. For men, specifically, avoid purely decorative design without practical function and the lack of clear information about use, preparation method, or composition.

In summary, the research confirmed that packaging is a fundamental strategic element in the brand-consumer relationship, not just an operational one. The data showed that women primarily associate value with packaging through symbolic, emotional, and informational attributes, while men orient their evaluations by functional attributes, such as practicality and durability. Both groups recognize packaging as a decisive factor in contexts of uncertainty and price equivalence, but they mobilize distinct criteria for this decision. The misalignment between declared intention and actual behavior in sustainability represents a central finding, indicating that environmental communication on packaging only translates into a purchase decision when it is not perceived as increasing the product’s price, reinforcing the importance of considering the perception differences between consumer profiles to optimize marketing strategies.

4. Conclusion

The study investigated consumer perception of the role of packaging in value generation and purchase decision-making, focusing on differences in criteria between men and women. It was found that women associated value with packaging primarily through symbolic, emotional, and informational attributes, perceiving it as an extension of the brand’s identity. In contrast, men based their evaluations on functional attributes, such as practicality, format, and durability. It was observed that packaging acts as a decisive factor in contexts of uncertainty and price equivalence for both genders, although the criteria used for this decision differed: women leaned towards aesthetics and detailed information, while men prioritized superior functionality. A relevant finding was the misalignment between the declared intention to value sustainability and the actual willingness to pay for sustainable products, indicating that price still outweighs environmental intention at the point of purchase. The study’s main contribution lies in the development of practical and differentiated recommendations for marketing professionals, enabling the development of more assertive packaging strategies for each consumer profile.

However, it is important to acknowledge the limitations of the present study, especially the sample profile, which was predominantly composed of individuals with higher education levels and residing in urban centers, potentially influencing the generalization of results to other contexts. Furthermore, the research relied on self-reported responses, which may lead to a discrepancy between what consumers state and their actual purchasing behavior. For future studies, it is suggested to investigate the role of packaging in specific product categories, such as cosmetics and food, where symbolism may be even more pronounced. The application of observational research techniques, such as eye-tracking, is also recommended to more accurately measure visual attention. Exploring the perceived value of packaging in unboxing contexts and in recurring app-mediated purchases represents another promising avenue for deepening the understanding of value perception formation before physical contact with the product.

Bibliographic References

Bara, R. et al. (2021). Sustainable Packaging and Consumer Behavior. Journal of Environmental Marketing.

Borges, A. R.; Soares, S. A.; Coelho, A.; Persilva, D. (2017). A Embalagem Sedutora na Gôndola do Supermercado: garantia de atratividade e estímulo ao desejo de consumo. Universidade FUMEC.

Garrán, V. G. (2006). A Influência dos Aspectos Visuais da Embalagem na Formação das Atitudes do Consumidor. Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo.

Gil, A. C. (2008). Métodos e Técnicas de Pesquisa Social. 6. ed. São Paulo: Atlas.

Harun, A.; Moury, F. (2019). Branding through Packaging Design. Journal of Marketing Research.

Hasibuan, M.; Nuraeni, R. (2023). Consumer Decision on Packaging Attributes. International Journal of Business Research.

Kemp, E.; Kopp, S. (2011). Gender Differences in Attention to Product Packaging. Journal of Marketing Communications.

Malhotra, N. K. (2012). Pesquisa de Marketing: uma orientação aplicada. 6. ed. Porto Alegre: Bookman.

Meyers-Levy, J. M.; Loken, B. (2015). Revisiting Gender Differences in Information Processing: Perspectives from Marketing and Psychology. Journal of Consumer Psychology.

Milner, T.; Fodness, D. (2018). Visual Attention and Consumer Choice. Journal of Consumer Behaviour.

Oliveira, M. N. (2022). Representação de Gênero no Design de Embalagem: Expressão de Neutralidade nos Atributos Visuais de Produtos Dermocosméticos Nacionais. Universidade Federal de Campina Grande.

Paiva, E. M.; Quirino, T. S. L.; Lima, E. C. M.; Paiva, J. A. (2024). The Influence of Makeup Packaging Attributes on Purchase Decision: A Segmented Analysis by Gender, Age, Education, and Income. SINGEP Conference Proceedings.

Pride, W. M.; Ferrel, O. C. (2016). Fundamentos de marketing: conceitos e práticas. São Paulo: Cengage Learning.

Silayoi, P.; Speece, M. (2007). The Importance of Packaging Attributes. British Food Journal.

Solomon, M. R. (2018). Consumer Behavior: Buying, Having, and Being. 12th ed. Harlow: Pearson Education.

Stefano, N. M. (2012). Analysis of Influence Attributes of the Packaging in the Point View of the Consumer at the Time of Purchase. Revista Gestão & Planejamento.

Underwood, R.; Klein, N. (2002). Packaging as Brand Communication. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice.

Article originating from the Final Course Work of the Specialization in Marketing of the MBA USP/Esalq

To learn more about the course, click here and access the MBX Academy platform