Abstract
Exaggerated portion sizes are generally pictured on the front of product packaging in order to stimulate food craving and encourage consumer purchasing decisions. However, one problem with such images is that they can set inappropriate norms as far as food consumption is concerned and hence result in people serving themselves more than they otherwise might. The research reported here builds on the fact that depicting a food portion in a smaller (vs. larger) container (i.e., plate or bowl) creates the illusion of a larger (vs. smaller) portion, although the actual quantity of food remains the same (this is known as the Delboeuf illusion). Here, we demonstrate in two experiments that by presenting food in a smaller container (thus giving rise to the illusion of a relatively larger portion), participants have higher purchase intentions (study 1) and perceive the food as being more appetizing (study 2) but, crucially, decrease the size of the portion that they serve themselves (studies 1 and 2). Overall, by giving the impression of a larger portion on product packaging, the Delboeuf illusion could potentially be used to nudge consumers to find food more desirable, while at the same time leading them to reduce their serving, thus potentially benefitting both consumers and the food industry.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
Note that Wansink et al. (2005), as well as other work by Brian Wansink, has recently come under scrutiny, and it appears that it contains some errors (e.g., https://medium.com/@jamesheathers/sprite-case-study-5-sunset-for-souper-man-ee898b6af9f5). However, other researchers in the field have also studied and put forward the portion size effect (Holden et al. 2016). It should, however, be noted that some meta-analyses, such as Robinson et al. (2014), did not find a consistent effect of dishware size on food intake.
openfoodfacts.org/ is a free and open database of food products from around the world, generally providing a picture of the food packaging. We have listed 128 packets of corn flakes and 224 packets of cheese pizza sold in 26 countries. All of the pizza plates were small, and we only found three bowls of cereals that were not small rimmed.
References
Aglioti, S., DeSouza, J. F., & Goodale, M. A. (1995). Size-contrast illusions deceive the eye but not the hand. Current Biology, 5(6), 679–685.
Akyol, A., Ayaz, A., Inan-Eroglu, E., Cetin, C., & Samur, G. (2018). Impact of three different plate colours on short-term satiety and energy intake: a randomized controlled trial. Nutrition Journal, 17(1), 46.
Barsalou, L. W. (2008). Grounded cognition. Annual Review of Psychology, 59, 617–645.
Basso, F., Petit, O., Le Bellu, S., Lahlou, S., Cancel, A., & Anton, J. L. (2018). Taste at first (person) sight: visual perspective modulates brain activity implicitly associated with viewing unhealthy but not healthy foods. Appetite, 128, 242–254.
Brand, J., & Wansink, B. (2016). Depicted versus stated serving sizes: exaggerated servings on packaging encourage overeating. Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior, 48(7), S91.
Brunstrom, J. M., & Shakeshaft, N. G. (2009). Measuring affective (liking) and non-affective (expected satiety) determinants of portion size and food reward. Appetite, 52(1), 108–114.
Cornil, Y., & Chandon, P. (2016). Pleasure as a substitute for size: how multisensory imagery can make people happier with smaller food portions. Journal of Marketing Research, 53(5), 847–864.
Delboeuf, F. J. (1865). Note sur certaines illusions d’optique: essai d’une théorie psychophysique de la manière dont l’œil apprécie les distances et les angles [Note on certain optical illusions: essay on a psychophysical theory concerning the way in which the eye evaluates distances and angles]. Bulletins de l’Académie Royale des Sciences, Lettres et Beaux-arts de Belgique, 19, 2nd ser., pp 195–216.
Elder, R. S., & Krishna, A. (2012). The “visual depiction effect” in advertising: facilitating embodied mental simulation through product orientation. Journal of Consumer Research, 38(6), 988–1003.
Franz, V. H., Gegenfurtner, K. R., Bülthoff, H. H., & Fahle, M. (2000). Grasping visual illusions: no evidence for a dissociation between perception and action. Psychological Science, 11(1), 20–25.
Guthrie, J., Mancino, L., & Lin, C. T. J. (2015). Nudging consumers toward better food choices: policy approaches to changing food consumption behaviors. Psychology and Marketing, 32(5), 501–511.
Holden, S. S., Zlatevska, N., & Dubelaar, C. (2016). Whether smaller plates reduce consumption depends on who’s serving and who’s looking: a meta-analysis. Journal of the Association for Consumer Research, 1(1), 134–146.
Labbe, D., Rytz, A., Godinot, N., Ferrage, A., & Martin, N. (2017). Is portion size selection associated with expected satiation, perceived healthfulness or expected tastiness? A case study on pizza using a photograph-based computer task. Appetite, 108, 311–316.
Madzharov, A. V., & Block, L. G. (2010). Effects of product unit image on consumption of snack foods. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 20(4), 398–409.
McClain, A. D., van den Bos, W., Matheson, D., Desai, M., McClure, S. M., & Robinson, T. N. (2014). Visual illusions and plate design: the effects of plate rim widths and rim coloring on perceived food portion size. International Journal of Obesity, 38(5), 657–662.
Papies, E. K. (2013). Tempting food words activate eating simulations. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 838.
Peng, M., Adam, S., Hautus, M. J., Shin, M., Duizer, L. M., & Yan, H. (2017). See food diet? Cultural differences in estimating fullness and intake as a function of plate size. Appetite, 117, 197–202.
Petit, O., Basso, F., Merunka, D., Spence, C., Cheok, A. D., & Oullier, O. (2016a). Pleasure and the control of food intake: an embodied cognition approach to consumer self-regulation. Psychology and Marketing, 33(8), 608–619.
Petit, O., Merunka, D., Anton, J.-L., Nazarian, B., Spence, C., Cheok, A. D., Raccah, D., & Oullier, O. (2016b). Health and pleasure in consumers’ dietary food choices: individual differences in the brain’s value system. PLoS One, 11(7), e0156333.
Petit, O., Spence, C., Velasco, C., Woods, A. T., & Cheok, A. D. (2017). Changing the influence of portion size on consumer behavior via imagined consumption. Journal of Business Research, 75, 240–248.
Robinson, E., Nolan, S., Tudur-Smith, C., Boyland, E. J., Harrold, J. A., Hardman, C. A., & Halford, J. C. (2014). Will smaller plates lead to smaller waists? A systematic review and meta-analysis of the effect that experimental manipulation of dishware size has on energy consumption. Obesity Reviews, 15(10), 812–821.
Sawada, R., Sato, W., Toichi, M., & Fushiki, T. (2017). Fat content modulates rapid detection of food: a visual search study using fast food and Japanese diet. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 1033.
Spence, C., Okajima, K., Cheok, A. D., Petit, O., & Michel, C. (2016). Eating with our eyes: from visual hunger to digital satiation. Brain and Cognition, 110, 53–63.
Tal, A., Niemann, S., & Wansink, B. (2017). Depicted serving size: cereal packaging pictures exaggerate serving sizes and promote overserving. BMC Public Health, 17(1), 169.
Thaler, R. H., & Sunstein, C. (2008). Nudge: improving decisions about health, wealth and happiness. London: Penguin Books.
Toepel, U., Bielser, M. L., Forde, C., Martin, N., Voirin, A., le Coutre, J., Murray, M. M., & Hudry, J. (2015). Brain dynamics of meal size selection in humans. NeuroImage, 113, 133–142.
Van der Laan, L. N., De Ridder, D. T. D., Viergever, M. A., & Smeets, P. A. (2011). The first taste is always with the eyes: a meta-analysis on the neural correlates of processing visual food cues. NeuroImage, 55(1), 296–303.
Van Ittersum, K., & Wansink, B. (2012). Plate size and color suggestibility: the Delboeuf Illusion’s bias on serving and eating behavior. Journal of Consumer Research, 39(2), 215–228.
Velasco, C., & Spence, C. (Eds.). (2019). Multisensory packaging: designing new product experiences. Cham: Palgrave MacMillan.
Versluis, I., & Papies, E. K. (2016). The role of social norms in the portion size effect: reducing normative relevance reduces the effect of portion size on consumption decisions. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 756.
Wansink, B., Painter, J. E., & North, J. (2005). Bottomless bowls: why visual cues of portion size may influence intake. Obesity Research, 13(1), 93–100.
Xie, H., Minton, E. A., & Kahle, L. R. (2016). Cake or fruit? Influencing healthy food choice through the interaction of automatic and instructed mental simulation. Marketing Letters, 27(4), 627–644.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Appendices
Appendix 1. The Delboeuf illusion
Appendix 2. Study 1 stimuli
Delboeuf illusion shown with pizza on a plate printed on the front of the packaging. The visual presentation giving rise to the larger portion illusion (left) was rated as looking 17% larger than the visual presentation giving rise to the smaller portion illusion (right).
Appendix 3. Study 2 stimuli
Delboeuf illusion shown with cereal bowls printed on the front of the product packaging. The larger portion illusion (left) was rated as looking 27% more calorific than the smaller-looking portion illusion (right).
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Petit, O., Velasco, C. & Spence, C. Are large portions always bad? Using the Delboeuf illusion on food packaging to nudge consumer behavior. Mark Lett 29, 435–449 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11002-018-9473-6
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11002-018-9473-6