A Cross-Cultural Exploration of Children's Preferences of Package Design: The U.S. and China

Journal of International Consumer Marketing

Volumn 26, Issue 5, 2014, Pages 391-404

  Zhang, Dan ^a  

^a CITY UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK   (United States)

Author keywords

Children; country difference; curvilinearily; figurativeness; gender difference; package design; preference

Indexed keywords

EID: 84907577394     PISSN: 08961530     EISSN: 15287068     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/08961530.2014.946170     Document Type: Article

References (76)

1. Alschuler, R. H., and W. Hattwick. l969. Painting and personality. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
2. Berenbaum, S. A., K. Korman, and C. Leveroni. 1995. Early hormones and sex differences in cognitive abilities. Learning and Individual Differences 7 (4): 303–321.
3. Berlyne, D. E. 1971. Aesthetics and psychology. New York: Meredith Corporation.
4. Birren, F. 1961. Color psychology and color therapy. New York: University Books.
5. Bloch, P. H. 1995. Seeking the ideal form: Product design and consumer response. Journal of Marketing 59 (3): 16–29.
6. Cárdenas, J. C., A. Dreber, E. Von Essen, and E. Ranehill. 2012. Gender differences in competitiveness and risk taking: Comparing children in Colombia and Sweden. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 83 (1): 11–23.
7. Chiu, S. W., S. Gervan, C. Fairbrother, L. L. Johnson, A. F. H. Owen-Anderson, S. J. Bradley, and K. J. Zucker. 2006. Sex-dimorphic color preference in children with gender identity disorder: A comparison to clinical and community controls. Sex Roles 55 (5–6): 385–395.
8. Danger, E. P. 1987. The color handbook. Brookfield, Vermont: Gower Technical Press.
9. Deutman, E. 1988. Beelden Bekijken. Kunsten & Educatie 1:33–44.
10. Eals, M., and I. Silverman. 1994. The hunter-gatherer theory of spatial sex differences: Proximate factors mediating the female advantage in recall of object arrays. Ethology and Sociobiology 15 (2): 95–105.
11. Eysenck, H. J. 1941. A critical and experimental study of color preference. American Journal of Psychology 54 (3): 385–391.
12. Fechner, G. T. 1871. Zur experimentellen Aesthetik. Leipzig, Germany: Hirzl.
13. Fechner, G. T. 1876. Vorschule der Aesthetik. Leipzig, Germany: Breitkopf und Hartel.
14. Fechner, G. T. 1997. Various attempts to establish a basic form of beauty: Experimental, aesthetics, golden section, and square. Empirical Studies of the Arts 2:115–130. (A translation by Monika Niemann, Julia Quehl, Holger Höge, and Carl von Ossietzky of “VerschiedeneVersuche, eine Grundform der Schönheit Aufzustellen. Experimentale Ästhetik, Goldner Schnittund Quadrat,” Vorschule der Äesthetik, by G. T. Fechner, Ch. 14. Leipzig: Breitkopf und Härtl.)
15. Franck, K., and E. Rosen. l949. A projective test of masculinity–femininity. Journal of Consulting Psychology 13 (4): 247–256.
16. Gardner, H. 1971. The development of sensitivity to artistic styles. Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 29 (4): 515–527.
17. Gardner, H. 1981. Children's perceptions of works of art: A developmental portrait. In Psychology and the arts, ed. D. O’Hare, 123–147. Sussex, England: The Harvester Press.
18. Gelperowic, R., and B. Beharrell. 1994. Healthy food products for children: Packaging and mothers’ purchase decisions. British Food Journal 96 (11): 4–8.
19. Goldberg M. E. 1990. A quasi-experiment assessing the effectiveness of TV advertising directed to children. Journal of Marketing Research 27 (4): 445–454.
20. Green, C. D. 1995. All that glitters: A review of psychological research on the aesthetics of the golden section. Perception 24 (8): 937–968.
21. Hammer, E. F. l980. The clinical application of projective drawings. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas.
22. Hardiman, G. W., and T. Zernich. 1977. Influence of style and subject matter on the development of children's art preferences. Studies in Art Education 19 (1): 29–35.
23. Hill, H., and J. Tilley. 2002. Packaging of children's breakfast cereal: Manufacturers versus children. British Food Journal 104 (9): 766–777.
24. Holden, M. P., S. J. Duff-Canning, and E. Hampson. 2014. Sex differences in the weighting of metric and categorical information in spatial location memory. Psychological Research (forthcoming).
25. Iijima, M., O. Arisaka, F. Minamoto, and Y. Arai. 2001. Sex differences in children's free drawings: A study on girls with congenital adrenal hyperplasia. Hormones and Behavior 40 (2): 99–104.
26. Jadva, V., M. Hines, and S. Golombok. 2010. Infants’ preferences for toys, colors, and shapes: Sex differences and similarities. Archives of Sexual Behavior 39 (6): 1261–1273.
27. Johnson, O., and R. H. Knapp. 1963. Sex differences in aesthetic preferences. Journal of Social Psychology 61 (2): 279–301.
28. Kogan, N. 1994. On aesthetics and its origins: Some psychobiological and evolutionary considerations. Social Research 61 (1): 139–165.
29. Lalo, C. 1908. L’esthétique expérimentale contemporaine. Paris: Alcan.
30. Lin, Y.-C., and I. Bin. 2011. Generation and gender differences in aesthetic responses to popular illustrations. Visual Arts Research 37 (1): 30–41.
31. LoBue, V., and J. S. DeLoache. 2011. Pretty in pink: The early development of gender-stereotyped colour preferences. British Journal of Developmental Psychology 29 (3): 656–667.
32. Luo, Y., and R. L. Tung. 2007. International expansion of emerging market enterprises: A springboard perspective. Journal of International Business Studies 38 (4): 481–498.
33. Machotka, P. 1966. Aesthetic criteria in childhood: Justifications of preference. Child Development 37 (4): 877–885.
34. Majewski, M. 1978. The relationship between the drawing characteristics of children and their sex. PhD diss., Illinois State University.
35. Marković, S. 2011. Perceptual, semantic and affective dimensions of experience of abstract and representational paintings. Psihologija 44 (3):191–210.
36. Martinsson, P., K. Nordblom, D. Rützler, and M. Sutter. 2011. Social preferences during childhood and the role of gender and age—An experiment in Austria and Sweden. Economics Letters 110 (3): 248–251.
37. McNeal, J. U. 1992. Kids as customers: A handbook of marketing to children. New York: Macmillan.
38. McNeal, J. U. 2007. On becoming a consumer: The development of consumer behavior patterns in childhood. Amsterdam; Boston: Butterworth-Heinemann.
39. McNiff, K. 1982. Sex differences in children's art. Journal of Education 164 (3): 271–289.
40. McWhinnie, H. J. 1970. A review of recent literature in perceptual/cognitive style. Studies in Art Education 11 (3): 31–38.
41. Miller, D. I., and D. F. Halpern. 2014. The new science of cognitive sex differences. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 18 (1): 37–45.
42. Miller, E. G., K. Seiders, M. Kenny, and M. E. Walsh. 2011. Children's use of on-package nutritional claim information. Journal of Consumer Behaviour 10 (3): 122–132.
43. Moss, G. 1995. Differences in the design aesthetic of men and women: Implications for product branding. Journal of Brand Management 3 (1): 51–61.
44. Moss, G. 1996. Assessment: Do males and females make judgments in a self-selecting fashion. Journal of Art and Design 15 (2): 161–169.
45. Moss, G. 1999. Gender and consumer behavior: Further explorations. Journal of Brand Management 7 (2): 88–100.
46. Moss, G., and A. Colman. 2001. Choices and preferences: Experiments on gender differences. Journal of Brand Management 9 (2): 89–99.
47. Moss, G., R. Gunn, and J. Heller. 2006. Some men like it black, some women like it pink: Consumer implications of differences in male and female website design. Journal of Consumer Behaviour 5 (4): 328–341.
48. Moss, G., C. Hamilton, and N. Neave. 2007. Evolutionary factors in design preferences. Journal of Brand Management 14 (4): 313–323.
49. Neperud, R. W., and K. Freedman. 1988. Bases of children's visual preferences and discriminations. Visual Arts Research 14 (1): 83–88.
50. Newton, C. 1989. A development study of aesthetic response using both verbal and nonverbal measures. Visual Arts Research 15 (1): 76–85.
51. Oluremi, A. M. 2010. Gender and preferred content in children's drawing among selected primary school children in Zaria Metropolis, Kaduna State. Gender and Behaviour 8 (2): 3168–3198.
52. Palmer, S. E., and K. B. Schloss. 2010. An ecological valence theory of human color preference. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 107 (19): 8877–8882.
53. Palmer, S. E., and K. B. Schloss. 2011. Ecological valence and human color preference. In New directions in colour studies, ed. C. P. Biggam, C. A. Hough, C. J. Kay, and D. R. Simmons, 361–376. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
54. Palmer, S. E., K. B. Schloss, and J. Sammartino. 2013. Visual aesthetics and human preference. Annual Review of Psychology 64:77–107.
55. Pennell, G. E. 1994. Babes in toyland: Learning an ideology of gender. Advances in Consumer Research 21 (1): 359–364.
56. Pérez-Carpinell, J., R. Baldoví, M. de Fez, and J. Castro. 1998. Color memory matching: Time effect and other factors. Colour Research and Application 23 (4): 234–247.
57. Picariello, M. L., D. N. Greenberg, and D. B. Pillemer. 1990. Children's sex related stereotyping of colors. Child Development 61 (5): 1453–1460.
58. Pires, C., and L. Agante. 2011. Encouraging children to eat more healthily: The influence of packaging. Journal of Consumer Behaviour 10 (3): 161–168.
59. Prendergast, P. G., and L. Pitt. 1996. Packaging, marketing, logistics and the environment: Are there trade-offs? International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management 26 (6): 60–72.
60. Prince, G. W. 1994. The contour: A packaging vision seen through Coke-bottle lenses. Beverage World 113 (1567, Periscope Edition, May 31): 1–6.
61. Raghubir, P., and E. A. Greenleaf. 2006. Ratios in proportion: What should be the shape of the package? Journal of Marketing 70 (2): 95–107.
62. Rettie, R., and C. Brewer. 2000. The verbal and visual components of package design. Journal of Product & Brand Management 9 (1): 56–70.
63. Rosenblatt, E., and E. Winner. 1988. The art of children's drawing. Journal of Aesthetic Education 22 (1): 3–15.
64. Roubertoux, P., M. Carlier, and J. Chaguiboff. 1971. Preference for non-objective art: Personal and psychosocial determiners. British Journal of Psychology 62 (1): 105–110.
65. Salkind, L., and N. Salkind. 1973. A measure of aesthetic preference. Studies in Art Education 15 (1): 21–27.
66. Salkind, L., and N. Salkind. 1997. Gender and age differences in preference for works of art. Studies in Art Education 38 (4): 246–256.
67. Savarese, J. M., and R. J. Miller. 1979. Artistic preferences and cognitive-perceptual style. Studies in Art Education 20 (2): 45–51.
68. Silayoi, P., and M. Speece. 2004. Packaging and purchase decisions. British Food Journal 106 (8): 607–628.
69. Silverman, I., and M. Eals. 1992. Sex differences in spatial abilities: Evolutionary theory and data. In Evolutionary psychology and the generation of culture, ed. J. Barkow, L. Cosmides, and J. Tooby, 533–549. New York: Oxford University Press.
70. Taunton, M. 1980. The influence of age on preferences for subject matter, realism, and spatial depth in painting reproductions. Studies in Art Education 21 (3): 40–53.
71. Thorndike, E. L. 1917. Individual differences in judgments of the beauty of simple forms. Psychological Review 24 (2): 147–153.
72. Tuman, D. M. 1999. Gender style as form and content: An examination of gender stereotypes in the subject preference of children's drawing. Studies in Art Education 41 (1): 40–60.
73. Usal, Y., S. Selhan, and A. N. Evcil. 2011. Exploring the development of cultural and art consciousness in Istanbul: A study of interior design students. Journal of Interior Design 36 (4): 19–30.
74. Uttal, D. H., N. G. Meadow, E. Tipton, L. L. Hand, A. R. Alden, C. Warren, and N. S. Newcombe. 2013. The malleability of spatial skills: A meta-analysis of training studies. Psychological Bulletin 139 (2): 352–402.
75. Wang, W., and K. Ishizaki. 2002. Aesthetic development in cross-cultural contexts: A study of art appreciation in Japan, Taiwan, and the United States. Studies in Art Education 43 (4): 373–392.
76. Wiersema, D. V., J. Van Der Schalk, and G. A. van Kleef. 2012. Who's afraid of red, yellow, and blue? Need for cognitive closure predicts aesthetic preferences. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts 6 (2): 168–174.