In a long-term, cross-department product development project, the product concept is the basis of decision-making. Concept testing presents the rationale for the product’s effectiveness in the early stages of development and allows the concept to permeate the organisation. However, due to the high degree of confidentiality, developers do not disclose information on concept testing. Consequently, there is limited academic research on the requirements for improving the quality of concept testing. In this study, we clarified the factors that improve the market share estimation accuracy in concept testing for the Japanese noodle soup base market. Through randomised controlled trials in an online survey environment, we found that it is important to use both the package design and product brand for a concept and present them to the respondents because food choices centre on sensory decision-making. Estimation accuracy is weakened by the presence of prices and corporate brands in an online survey environment. As an increased variety of information does not improve survey quality, product developers should instead focus on the packaging design and product branding that contribute to concept testing. Our study results yield useful suggestions for practitioners involved in concept testing, given the lack of scientific literature.
AakerD. A. (2004a). Brand portfolio strategy. Simon & Schuster.
2.
AakerD. A. (2004b). Leveraging the corporate brand. California Management Review, 46(3), 6–18. https://doi.org/10.1177/000812560404600301
3.
AmeenN., TarhiniA., ShahM. H., & NusairK. (2021). A cross cultural study of gender differences in omnichannel retailing contexts. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 58, 102265. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2020.102265
4.
AntikainenM., MäkipääM., & AhonenM. (2010). Motivating and supporting collaboration in open innovation. European Journal of Innovation Management, 13(1), 100–119. https://doi.org/10.1108/14601061011013258
5.
AresG., MawadF., GiménezA., & MaicheA. (2014). Influence of rational and intuitive thinking styles on food choice: Preliminary evidence from an eye-tracking study with yogurt labels. Food Quality and Preference, 31, 28–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2013.07.005
6.
AssakerG. (2020). Age and gender differences in online travel reviews and user-generated-content (UGC) adoption: Extending the technology acceptance model (TAM) with credibility theory. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, 29(4), 428–449. https://doi.org/10.1080/19368623.2019.1653807
7.
BalestriniC., & Campo-CelayaT. (2016). With the advent of domestic 3-dimensional (3D) printers and their associated reduced cost, is it now time for every medical school to have their own 3D printer?Medical Teacher, 38(3), 312–313. https://doi.org/10.3109/0142159X.2015.1060305
8.
BogueR. (2013). 3D printing: The dawn of a new era in manufacturing?Assembly Automation, 33(4), 307–311. https://doi.org/10.1108/AA-06-2013-055
9.
BörgerT. (2016). Are fast responses more random? Testing the effect of response time on scale in an online choice experiment. Environmental and Resource Economics, 65(2), 389–413. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10640-015-9905-1
10.
Bou-MitriC., AbdessaterM., ZgheibH., & AkikiZ. (2020). Food packaging design and consumer perception of the product quality, safety, healthiness and preference. Nutrition & Food Science, 51(1), 71–86. https://doi.org/10.1108/NFS-02-2020-0039
11.
CernatA., & LiuM. (2019). Radio buttons in web surveys: Searching for alternatives. International Journal of Market Research, 61(3), 266–286. https://doi.org/10.1177/1470785318813520
12.
ChitturiR., LondoñoJ. C., & HenriquezM. C. (2022). Visual design elements of product packaging: implications for consumers’ emotions, perceptions of quality, and price. Color Research & Application, 47(3), 729–744. https://doi.org/10.1002/col.22761
13.
DaikelerJ., SilberH., & BošnjakM. (2022). A meta-analysis of how country-level factors affect web survey response rates. International Journal of Market Research, 64(3), 306–333. https://doi.org/10.1177/14707853211050916
14.
DurmuşoğluS. S., & BarczakG. (2011). The use of information technology tools in new product development phases: Analysis of effects on new product innovativeness, quality, and market performance. Industrial Marketing Management, 40(2), 321–330. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2010.08.009
15.
EiseleG., VachonH., LafitG., KuppensP., HoubenM., Myin-GermeysI., & ViechtbauerW. (2022). The effects of sampling frequency and questionnaire length on perceived burden, compliance, and careless responding in experience sampling data in a student population. Assessment, 29(2), 136–151. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073191120957102
16.
FenkoA., LottermanH., & GaletzkaM. (2016). What’s in a name? The effects of sound symbolism and package shape on consumer responses to food products. Food Quality and Preference, 51, 100–108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2016.02.021
17.
GallarzaM. G., Gil-SauraI., & HolbrookM. B. (2011). The value of value: Further excursions on the meaning and role of customer value. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 10(4), 179–191. https://doi.org/10.1002/cb.328
18.
García-MilonA., Martínez-RuizM. P., Olarte-PascualC., & Pelegrin-BorondoJ. (2019). Does the product test really make a difference? Evidence from the launch of a new wine. Food Quality and Preference, 71, 422–430.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2018.08.007
19.
GardnerB. B., & LevyS. J. (1955). The product and the brand. Harvard Business Review, 33(2), 33–39.
20.
Gil-PérezI., RebollarR., & LidónI. (2020). Without words: The effects of packaging imagery on consumer perception and response. Current Opinion in Food Science, 33, 69–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cofs.2019.12.006
21.
GrunertK. G., VerbekeW., KüglerJ. O., SaeedF., & ScholdererJ. (2011). Use of consumer insight in the new product development process in the meat sector. Meat Science, 89(3), 251–258. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2011.04.024
22.
HaL., ZhangC., & JiangW. (2020). Data quality comparison between computers and smartphones in different web survey modes and question formats. Internet Research, 30(6), 1763–1781. https://doi.org/10.1108/INTR-09-2018-0417
23.
HeiskanenE., HyvönenK., NivaM., PantzarM., TimonenP., & VarjonenJ. (2007). User involvement in radical innovation: Are consumers conservative?European Journal of Innovation Management, 10(4), 489–509. https://doi.org/10.1108/14601060710828790
24.
HomburgC., SchwemmleM., & KuehnlC. (2015). New product design: Concept, measurement, and consequences. Journal of Marketing, 79(3), 41–56. https://doi.org/10.1509/jm.14.0199
25.
HwangY. M., & LeeK. C. (2018). Using an eye-tracking approach to explore gender differences in visual attention and shopping attitudes in an online shopping environment. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 34(1), 15–24. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2017.1314611
26.
JeonJ. E. (2017). The impact of brand concept on brand equity. Asia Pacific Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 11(2), 233–245. https://doi.org/10.1108/APJIE-08-2017-030
27.
KatoT. (2019). Verification of perception difference between actual space and VR space in car design. International Journal on Interactive Design and Manufacturing (IJIDeM), 13(3), 1233–1244. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12008-019-00568-5
28.
KatoT., & MiuraT. (2021). The impact of questionnaire length on the accuracy rate of online surveys. Journal of Marketing Analytics, 9(2), 83–98. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41270-021-00105-y
29.
KellerK. L., & RicheyK. (2006). The importance of corporate brand personality traits to a successful 21st century business. Journal of Brand Management, 14(1), 74–81. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.bm.2550055
KrishnaA., CianL., & AydınoğluN. Z. (2017). Sensory aspects of package design. Journal of Retailing, 93(1), 43–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretai.2016.12.002
32.
LalwaniA. K., & ForcumL. (2016). Does a dollar get you a dollar’s worth of merchandise? The impact of power distance belief on price-quality judgments. Journal of Consumer Research, 43(2), 317–333. https://doi.org/10.1093/jcr/ucw019
33.
LansengE. J., & OlsenL. E. (2012). Brand alliances: The role of brand concept consistency. European Journal of Marketing, 46(9), 1108–1126.https://doi.org/10.1108/03090561211247874
34.
LeeJ. E., & Chen-YuJ. H. (2018). Effects of price discount on consumers’ perceptions of savings, quality, and value for apparel products: Mediating effect of price discount affect. Fashion and Textiles, 5(1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40691-018-0128-2
35.
LeeY. I., JinY., & NowakG. (2018). Motivating influenza vaccination among young adults: The effects of public service advertising message framing and text versus image support. Social Marketing Quarterly, 24(2), 89–103. https://doi.org/10.1177/1524500418771283
36.
LiC., PengL., & CuiG. (2017). Picking winners: New product concept testing with item response theory. International Journal of Market Research, 59(3), 335–353. Available from: https://doi.org/10.2501/IJMR-2017-027
37.
LimX. J., CheahJ. H., NgS. I., BashaN. K., & LiuY. (2021). Are men from Mars, women from Venus? Examining gender differences towards continuous use intention of branded apps. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 60, 102422. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2020.102422.
38.
LinX., FeathermanM., BrooksS. L., & HajliN. (2019). Exploring gender differences in online consumer purchase decision making: An online product presentation perspective. Information Systems Frontiers, 21(5), 1187–1201. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-018-9831-1
39.
MalekiS., Amiri AghdaieS. F., ShahinA., & AnsariA. (2020). Investigating the relationship among the Kansei-based design of chocolate packaging, consumer perception, and willingness to buy. Journal of Marketing Communications, 26(8), 836–855. https://doi.org/10.1080/13527266.2019.1590855
40.
McWhirterJ. E., & Hoffman-GoetzL. (2015). Systematic review of population-based studies on the impact of images on UV attitudes and behaviours. Health Promotion International, 30(2), 397–410. https://doi.org/10.1093/heapro/dat031
41.
MeulemanB., LangerA., & BlomA. G. (2018). Can incentive effects in web surveys be generalized to non-western countries? Conditional and unconditional cash incentives in a web survey of Ghanaian university students. Social Science Computer Review, 36(2), 231–250. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439317699577
42.
Meyers-LevyJ., & LokenB. (2015). Revisiting gender differences: What we know and what lies ahead. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 25(1), 129–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2014.06.003
MohanM., VossK. E., JiménezF. R., & GammohB. S. (2018). Corporate brands as brand allies. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 27(1), 41–56. https://doi.org/10.1108/JPBM-01-2016-1080
45.
NeuertC. E., & LenznerT. (2021). Effects of the number of open-ended probing questions on response quality in cognitive online pretests. Social Science Computer Review, 39(3), 456–468. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439319866397
46.
OzerM. (2011). The moderating roles of prior experience and behavioral importance in the predictive validity of new product concept testing. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 28(1), 109–122. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5885.2010.00784.x
47.
ParkC. W., JaworskiB. J., & MacInnisD. J. (1986). Strategic brand concept-image management. Journal of Marketing, 50(4), 135–145. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224298605000401
48.
ParkC. W., MilbergS., & LawsonR. (1991). Evaluation of brand extensions: The role of product feature similarity and brand concept consistency. Journal of Consumer Research, 18(2), 185–193. http://doi.org/10.1086/209251
49.
PengL., CuiG., & LiC. (2012). Individual differences in consumer responses to traditional versus virtual concept testing. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 21(3), 167–175. https://doi.org/10.1108/10610421211228784
50.
PengL., & FinnA. (2010). How cloudy a crystal ball: A psychometric assessment of concept testing. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 27(2), 238–252. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5885.2010.00712.x
51.
PengL., & FinnA. (2008). Concept testing: The state of contemporary practice. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 26(6), 649–674. https://doi.org/10.1108/02634500810902884
52.
PetitO., VelascoC., & SpenceC. (2018). Are large portions always bad? Using the Delboeuf illusion on food packaging to nudge consumer behavior. Marketing Letters, 29(4), 435–449. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11002-018-9473-6
53.
PutrevuS. (2001). Exploring the origins and information processing differences between men and women: Implications for advertisers. Academy of Marketing Science Review, 10(1), 1–14.
54.
RambabuL., & PorikaR. (2020). Packaging strategies: Knowledge outlook on consumer buying behaviour. Journal of Industry–University Collaboration, 2(2), 67–78. https://doi.org/10.1108/JIUC-10-2019-0017
55.
RevillaM., & OchoaC. (2015). What are the links in a web survey among response time, quality, and auto-evaluation of the efforts done?Social Science Computer Review, 33(1), 97–114. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439314531214
56.
RobertsC., GilbertE., AllumN., & EisnerL. (2019). Research synthesis: Satisficing in surveys: A systematic review of the literature. Public Opinion Quarterly, 83(3), 598–626. https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfz035.
57.
SchiffersteinH. N., de BoerA., & LemkeM. (2021). Conveying information through food packaging: A literature review comparing legislation with consumer perception. Journal of Functional Foods, 86, 104734. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jff.2021.104734
58.
SimmondsG., & SpenceC. (2017). Thinking inside the box: How seeing products on, or through, the packaging influences consumer perceptions and purchase behaviour. Food Quality and Preference, 62, 340–351. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2016.11.010
Stokburger-SauerN. E., & TeichmannK. (2013). Is luxury just a female thing? The role of gender in luxury brand consumption. Journal of Business Research, 66(7), 889–896. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2011.12.007
61.
SunJ., SongS., HouseD., & KwonM. (2019). Role of gender differences on individuals’ responses to electronic word-of-mouth in social interactions. Applied Economics, 51(28), 3001–3014. https://doi.org/10.1080/00036846.2018.1564015
62.
SwaniK., MilneG. R., & MillerE. G. (2021). Social media services branding: The use of corporate brand names. Journal of Business Research, 125, 785–797. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.04.033
63.
TifferetS., & HersteinR. (2012). Gender differences in brand commitment, impulse buying, and hedonic consumption. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 21(3), 176–182. https://doi.org/10.1108/10610421211228793
64.
TihS., WongK. K., LynnG. S., & ReillyR. R. (2016). Prototyping, customer involvement, and speed of information dissemination in new product success. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 31(4), 437–448. https://doi.org/10.1108/JBIM-09-2014-0182
65.
TopalogluO., & GokalpO. N. (2018). How brand concept affects consumer response to product recalls: A longitudinal study in the US auto industry. Journal of Business Research, 88, 245–254. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.03.035
66.
TorelliC. J., MongaA. B., & KaikatiA. M. (2012). Doing poorly by doing good: Corporate social responsibility and brand concepts. Journal of Consumer Research, 38(5), 948–963. https://doi.org/10.1086/660851
67.
Van KleefE., Van TrijpH. C., & LuningP. (2005). Consumer research in the early stages of new product development: A critical review of methods and techniques. Food Quality and Preference, 16(3), 181–201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2004.05.012
68.
VossK. E., & MohanM. (2016). Corporate brand effects in brand alliances. Journal of Business Research, 69(10), 4177–4184.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.03.007
69.
WoodD., HarmsP. D., LowmanG. H., & DeSimoneJ. A. (2017). Response speed and response consistency as mutually validating indicators of data quality in online samples. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 8(4), 454–464. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550617703168
70.
WuF., SunQ., GrewalR., & LiS. (2019). Brand name types and consumer demand: Evidence from China’s automobile market. Journal of Marketing Research, 56(1), 158–175. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022243718820571
71.
Yamaki. (n.d.). Men tsuyu. https://www.yamaki.co.jp/mentsuyu/ (Accessed 1August2022).
ZamudioC., & JewellR. D. (2020). What’s in a name? Scent brand names, olfactory imagery, and purchase intention. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 30(2), 281–292. https://doi.org/10.1108/JPBM-06-2019-2418
74.
ZengT., DurifF., & RobinotE. (2021). Can eco-design packaging reduce consumer food waste? An experimental study. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 162, 120342. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2020.120342
75.
ZenkerS. (2014). Measuring place brand equity with the advanced Brand Concept Map (aBCM) method. Place Branding and Public Diplomacy, 10(2), 158–166. https://doi.org/10.1057/pb.2014.2
76.
ZubrV., MohelskaH., & SokolovaM. (2018). How product brand affect consumer decision. In SieminskiA., KozierkiewiczA., NunezM., & HaQ. (Eds), Modern approaches for intelligent information and database systems (pp. 281–291). Springer.
