Tartu University doctoral thesis reveals packaging design secrets

A new doctoral thesis defended at the University of Tartu shows that nearly 40% of new products fail at launch because eye-catching packaging alone is not enough. Researcher Kristian Pentus developed a three-part neuromarketing framework that simultaneously measures product visibility, facial expressions, and rational preferences to better predict consumer purchasing decisions.

A doctoral thesis defended at the University of Tartu on 29 May 2026 reveals why nearly 40% of new products fail shortly after reaching store shelves, and why the answer lies far beyond the design of the packaging itself. Researcher Kristian Pentus argues that companies must measure consumer behaviour through multiple simultaneous lenses to accurately predict what will end up in the shopping basket.

Why packaging alone is not enough

The food industry is intensely competitive, with shelves offering far more choices than any shopper actually needs. Yet most manufacturers still rely primarily on questionnaires and interviews to understand consumer preferences, methods that have a fundamental weakness: people often cannot articulate why they chose one product over another, and may not reveal their true motivations at all.

«Basically, we can learn a little about what a person cannot describe themselves about their own preferences and attention,» explained Pentus, the thesis author.

To address this gap, Pentus developed a three-part research framework that treats a purchase decision as a single integrated process. First, eye-tracking technology determines whether a shopper notices a product on the shelf at all. Second, software analyses facial muscle movements to identify the emotions triggered by the packaging. Third, conjoint analysis examines which product attributes, such as colour, design, or label information, most influence rational choice.

The danger of measuring only one dimension

Evaluating these components in isolation can produce dangerously misleading results. A purple meat package, for instance, might win an eye-tracking test because it stands out immediately on the shelf. But mere visibility is not enough: if the unusual colour fails to generate a positive emotional response, or conflicts with a shopper's expectations of what meat packaging should look like, the product may still be passed over.

The reverse problem is equally real. Pentus cited a product featuring a smiling elderly woman on its packaging: in a laboratory setting it created warm, positive feelings, but in an actual store it could be lost among hundreds of competing products. Appealing design counts for little if the shopper never notices it.

Packaging also plays different roles at different stages of the buying journey. From a distance, large design elements and colours help shoppers quickly locate a product. Once they begin comparing options, finer details, taste descriptions, ingredients, become far more important.

Laboratory vs. real store conditions

The thesis also identified a methodological problem in laboratory studies where packaging is displayed on a computer screen. In such settings, a person's gaze naturally gravitates toward the centre of the monitor, which acts as a visual frame. Products placed in the centre of the image therefore receive an artificial advantage in visibility tests that would not exist on a real shelf.

In an actual store, attention is guided by entirely different factors: the product's height from the floor, its colour, size, and its neighbouring competitors. Pentus stressed that results from screen-based tests cannot be straightforwardly transferred to real shopping environments. Lab experiments must be designed to replicate, as closely as possible, how people actually move between shelves.

He illustrated the issue with an ice cream brand whose manufacturer designed bold, colourful packaging for different flavours. Eye-tracking tests showed excellent shelf visibility, but the design had eliminated a crucial cue for shoppers: neither the product name nor any visual hint (such as strawberries or vanilla pods) indicated which flavour was which. Since shoppers typically seek a specific flavour rather than a brand, the design risked causing confusion at point of sale. The products reached the market; the packaging design did not.

Neuromarketing is not a "buy button"

Pentus also noted that less-studied packaging attributes, material, colour, and tactile feel, can significantly affect consumer perception. The same juice can taste sweeter or more sour depending solely on the colour of its container. «The taste doesn't change, but your perception does,» he said.

Large international corporations have already invested enormous sums in consumer behaviour research, building dedicated neuromarketing laboratories. Pentus mentioned one classified underground research centre in Central Europe where full shopping mall simulations have been constructed to study which products capture attention and which designs trigger emotions.

Yet neuromarketing is not a magic switch. «Actually, there is no buy button,» Pentus emphasised. Packaging can attract attention and influence emotions, but the final purchase decision always results from the interplay of many factors.

He also argued that the same methodology can be used to support healthier consumer choices, for example, making nutritional information more visible and easier to understand on packaging. «It's like a knife. With a knife you can spread butter and cut bread, but you can also stab someone,» he added.

Practical advice for shoppers

Pentus offered practical tips for consumers wanting to resist the pull of persuasive packaging: avoid shopping on an empty stomach, and take time once a month to calmly review your habitual choices. «If you improve your shopping basket element by element like this, it will soon be much healthier,» he concluded.

The doctoral thesis, titled A Conjoint-Enriched Neuromarketing Research Framework for Package Design Research, was supervised by Andres Kuusik and Andero Uusberg. Opponents were Jesper Orla Clement from Copenhagen Business School and Timothy Paul Holmes from the University of London.