“Effect of packaging and labeling information on

consumer learning with respect to food product in

Punjab (India)”

Submitted to Lovely Professional University

In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the award of degree of

MASTER OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

Submitted by: Supervisor:

Group No TM04 Mr. Abhishek Dutta

Asad Gour RT1901 “B43” Senior lecturer.

Rajan Kumar RT1901 “A17”.

Prashant Kumar RT1901 “A19”

Chandan Kumar. RT1901 “B58”

DEPARTMENT OF MANAGEMENT

LOVELY PROFESSIONAL UNIVERSITY

PHAGWARA

(2011)

1
 TO WHOMSOEVER IT MAY CONCERN

This is to certify that the project report titled “________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________”
carried out by Mr._________________(student name), S/o or D/o____________(Father’s Name)
has been accomplished under my guidance & supervision as a duly registered MBA student of the
Lovely Professional University, Phagwara. This project is being submitted by him/her in the
partial fulfillment of the requirements for the award of the Master of Business Administration
from Lovely Professional University.

His dissertation represents his original work and is worthy of consideration for the award of the
degree of Master of Business Administration.

___________________________________

(Name & Signature of the Faculty Advisor)

Date:

2
 DECLARATION

I, "________________________________(student's name)”, hereby declare that the work

presented herein is genuine work done originally by me and has not been published or submitted
elsewhere for the requirement of a degree programme. Any literature, data or works done by
others and cited within this dissertation has been given due acknowledgement and listed in the
reference section.

_______________________

(Student's name & Signature)

_______________________

(Registration No.)

Date:__________________

3
 Acknowledgement:

It was a great pleasure and a unique experience to work on this project and on its completion. We
would like to express my sincere thanks and gratitude to those who have extended their valuable
time, co-operation and guidance during the time of the study.

Completing a project without proper guidance is like sailing alone in an ocean without a
compass. We must affirm our thankfulness to our guide Mr. Abhishek Dutta for their kind
guidance, during my capstone project.

We must put on record our gratitude towards our faculty, without whom we, would not have
reached to the conclusion of the project. It was through their efforts that we could complete the
project well in time.

The respondents constituted the back bone of the project. Thanks to the respondents who had
taken out some time out of their busy schedule to fill in my questionnaire without which the
survey could not have taken place.

Prashant Kumar

Chandan Kumar

Asad Gour

Rajan Kumar

4
 Executive Summary

Objective/purpose of the study

This descriptive study aims to identify the most important factors which influence consumers’
learning after reading the packaging information on the food product.

Scope of the study

• The study has been conducted in Ludhiana, Jalandhar and Phagwara of Punjab.

• It is decided to consider all malls in these places like big bazaar, vishal mega mart, easy
day, where can easily find out the respondent for the survey.

Methodology

The study was descriptive in nature with survey method being used to complete the study
because this research is the most commonly used and the basic reason for carrying out
descriptive research is to identify the consumer learning through the information given on
food products. Population of research has been taken the people of various cities of
Punjab. A sample size of “500” consumers of Punjab (100 respondent from Ludhiana, 200
respondent from Jalandhar and 200 respondent from Phagwara) are taken for the purpose
of study and analysis. The sampling technique has been used; Simple random sampling
technique for choosing the various cities of Punjab that is Ludhiana, Phagwara, and
Jalandhar, quota sampling for dividing the number of respondent in the selected city
(Ludhiana, Phagwara, and jullundhar) 100 respondent from Ludhiana, 200 respondents
from Jalandhar and 200 respondents from Phagwara, and Convenience sampling
technique for collecting the data conveniently from the mall of selected cities of Punjab
for the survey. Primary data was collected with the help of structured questionnaire and
personal interview with consumers and for analysis of collected data we will use SPSS,
Microsoft excel.

5
Findings

• The study shows the people of Punjab really health Conesus.

• Packaging information plays important role to make purchase decision of customer.

• The mostly consumers check the content detail, nutritional facts and the way of using.

• The packaging information is significantly effect on consumer learning.

• The most important thing is all respondents are aware about the food packet information.

• All respondents are checking packaging information at the time of purchasing food
products.

Recommendation

After analyzing the facts and by talking to the people following suggestions came out: -

1. The information provided by companies on food packet, the font size is much smaller
which is not seen clearly to all therefore companies should give it in appropriate size for
clear view to all on food packet.

2. The 2nd most important thing is that in some cases abbreviation are used for few words that
is not understandable to some people. So there should be full name must be given with
abbreviation.

3. During conversation with respondents many of them said that in some product they were
not able to find the information easily due to the information is given in some case at the
bottom of the packet, in some case at the upper side of the packet, and sometime they did
not find the information that is useful to them. So therefore companies should try to give it
at a fixed place every time which can be found by the customer easily.

4. The information provided by companies on food packet, should be in contrast and deep
color for the purpose of visibility.

6
 5. The language used for packaging information should be simple and the easily
understandable by customers.

TABLE OF CONTENT

S. No NAME OF THE TOPICS PAGE NO.

1 Chapter - 1 :
a) Introduction to the topic 08
b) Consumer learning 09
2 Chapter - 2 :
a) Review of literature 10-14
Chapter – 3 :
a) Need of the study 15
b) Objective of the study 16
c) Scope of the study 16
d) Research methodology 17-19
e) Hypothesis 19
f) Factor analysis 20-25
Chapter – 4 :
a) Data analysis 27-29
b) Demography analysis by charts & bar 30-37

graph
Chapter – 5 :
a) Findings 38
b) Conclusion 39
c) Limitation 40
d) Recommendation 41
e) Reference 42-43
f) Important URL 44
g) Appendix (questionnaire). 45-47

CHAPTER-1: INTRODUCTION TO THE TOPIC

7
Packaging is the science, art and technology of enclosing or protecting products for distribution,
storage, sale, and use.

The objective of foodstuff packaging is to guarantee that consumers have access to complete
information on the content and composition of products, in order to protect their health and their
interests. Other information may provide details on a particular aspect of the product, such as its
origin or production method. Some foodstuffs, such as genetically modified organisms, allergenic
foods, foods intended for infants or even various beverages, are also subject to specific
regulations.

In 1990, the Nutrition Packaging and Education Act went into effect. The USDA and the FDA
designed the requirements so that consumers would have useful information about the food they
eat. According to the Nutrition Packaging and Education Act, all food packets must contain the
following information:

• Common name of the product

• Name and address of the product’s manufacturer
• Net contents in terms of weight, measure or count, and:

Ingredient List – Lists the ingredients in descending order of predominance and weight. In
Crispy Crunches, the ingredients are listed at the bottom of the label. As you can see, the
predominant ingredient is corn, next is oil, then cheese, etc.

Serving Sizes – Each package must identify the size of a serving. In Crispy Crunches, one
package contains one serving. The nutritional information given on the food packet is based
on one serving of the food.

Nutrition Facts – each package must identify the quantities of specified nutrients and food
constituents for one serving. From this information, you can gleam some very useful information.

Consumer learning:

8
A process by which individuals acquire the purchase and consumption knowledge and experience
that they apply to future related behavior.

Information given on the packet of food product helps consumer to make cognitive learning in
their mind. The cognitive learning may influence the consumer buying behavior and make
different perceptions about product.

9
 (Some pics of food product on which it is showing the packaging information)

CHAPTER-2: REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Drichoutis, Andreas C., Panagiotis Lazaridis, and Rodolfo M. Nayga (2006) Diet-related
health problems have increased dramatically over the last few years. Consequently, nutritional
packaging has emerged as an important aspect of consumers' food purchase decisions. Nutritional
content in food products is considered to be a credence attribute. However, if trustworthy
nutritional labels are available, nutritional labels could function as a search characteristic. This
paper synthesized the results of empirical research related to nutritional label use. The summary
of results presented in this paper provides valuable information for directions for future research
and development of theoretical and empirical studies. Our review indicates that several factors
affect the use of nutrition information, but a number of these factors have conflicting effects due
to differences and diversity in methodology, data, timing, location, and scope of the studies. In
addition, although there is some consistency as to which general factors are considered by
researchers, the range of factors included in the individual studies varied considerably. There also
seems to be a need to broaden research in specific directions in order to increase the
generalizability of the findings. Petra Tenbült, et.al (2007) The purpose of this paper is to
provide insight into whether GM-packaging leads to different processing behavior of food stimuli
compared to when products are not labeled. A task was designed to investigate people's
categorization behavior as a function of information provided. In two studies each participant was
randomly allocated to either the experimental "GM-labeled condition", or the control "non-
labeled condition". Different processing strategies and different characteristics are used to judge
products that are labeled as genetically modified or not. GM packaging of foods is interpreted to
induce analytical processing of information and therefore the products are classified relatively
more often on the basis of verifiable categorization criteria compared to when they were not
labeled as GM. When products are not labeled as GM, information is more likely to be
automatically processed and non-verifiable categorization criteria are used. This is the first study
to examine the processes that packaging as GM brings about. The categorization criteria on the
basis of which the participants classified the products into two groups were scored. Six different

10
criteria were mentioned by the participants (whether they ate it or not, whether it was healthy or
not, whether the products were vegetable or animal, whether it was natural or not, whether it was
a processed product or not and whether it they accepted it or not). We regrouped the criteria in
two major groups, namely the "verifiable categorizations. Hilary Oliver (2008) so many
consumers are taking time to read nutrition labels, there is also a marketing opportunity for food
manufacturers to provide consumer-friendly information on labels that may entice shoppers to
switch brands at the point of purchase," said Deepak Varma, senior vice president of Nielsen
Customized Research. "Food marketers can make relatively low investments in pack and
packaging changes compared to advertising and promotions, and drive significant sales. Alan
Osborn (2009) A proposed regulation on the provision of food information to consumers --
suggests, has a rather broader remit than the simple packaging of food and drink products. In
respect of actual packaging, the proposed resolution clarifies the responsibility for packaging in
respect of different food business operators along the supply chain, introduces a minimum print
size for carrying information on labels, and requires that information on allergenic ingredients
should be available for non-pre-packed foods sold through retail and catering outlets. At present
there were no comprehensive rules on compulsory packaging in the EU and the present legal
provisions have become simply confusing, thus giving rise to legal uncertainty. . Uniform EU
rules on food packaging "is a necessary step", such uniformity would make for transparency in
the interests of consumers and would offer food enterprises a greater degree of legal certainty,
since a whole series of existing provisions would be combined in the new regulation. Jennie
Feight, Nashat Zuraikat (2009) the issue of cloned food packaging came to the forefront on
January 15, 2008, with the release of a controversial report by the Food and Drug Administration
(FDA). This paper aims to explore issues surrounding cloned food sources, specifically the
increasingly vocal demands by the American public for mandatory packaging. This paper reviews
literature to examine the culture and structure of the FDA over the past ten years. Ethical,
economic and public health concerns surrounding cloned food sources are also examined.
Comparisons are made to the shared history of genetically modified organisms (GMOs). Political
process and implementation of the Cloned Food Packaging Act (S. 414) are explored. The FDA
faces legal and cultural pressure to speed medications to market. The processes created by this
struggle also affect the regulation of agriculture; this can be seen in the similar histories of GMOs
and cloned food. Ethical issues surrounding cloned food packaging include animal welfare and

11
the usurpation of the creator's role. Nicholas J Ollberding (2010) this research indicates that a
simple logo helped students identify healthful food choices, and positively influenced food
choice," commented Professor Freedman. "It would be interesting to determine if a combination
of point-of-purchase nutrition information, coupled with economic incentives (e.g. lower prices
for healthier foods) would further drive consumers to choose these healthier food items. We must
aggressively test such options in light of the increasing threat of obesity to the health of our
society. Low rates of label use also suggest that national campaigns or modification of the food
label may be needed to reduce the proportion of the population not using this information.
Possible changes to the current label that have been suggested include bolding calorie
information, reporting the total nutrient intake for foods likely to be consumed in a single sitting,
and using more intuitive packaging that requires less cognitive processing such as a red, yellow,
and green 'traffic light' signs on the front of the label. The food label alone is not expected to be
sufficient in modifying behavior ultimately leading to improved health outcomes, but may be
used by individuals and nutrition professionals as a valuable and motivating tool in our efforts to
combat obesity and diet-related chronic disease. Swati Bhardwaj (2010) The Food Safety and
Standards Act 2006, amended in 2008, says food items should carry labels that include the weight
of the product, list of ingredients present and nutrition information-including total calories
(energy value) as well as amounts of protein, carbohydrate, fat, sodium (salt), sugars, dietary
fibre, vitamins and minerals. According to Anoop Mishra, director and head of the department of
diabetes, obesity and metabolic diseases, Fortis Hospitals, New Delhi, it is a myth that if a label
says "cholesterol free", then the product will not affect blood cholesterol levels. , the small-scale
manufacturers either skip this packaging procedure or mislead the consumers through false
claims," says Swati Bhardwaj, nutritionist, National Diabetes, Obesity and Cholesterol
Foundation (N-Doc), New Delhi. Even larger companies, some playing by more stringent rules in
international markets, are guilty of misleading with labels such as "heart healthy", "fat free" or
"sugar free", based on myths and half-truths. Kala Vijayraghavan, Ratna Bhushan. (2010)
Most food companies in India have started reducing portion sizes and are reformulating existing
products to reduce saturated fat, cholesterol, added sugars and sodium in line with global trends.
Food and beverage companies are gearing up to meet the requirements of the integrated food law
that will be mandatory this year, say industry players. The unified food law plans to set up,
among other things, mandatory packaging of ingredients, and a scientific panel to audit the claims

12
made by functional foods flooding the market. The food law will also include a feature called
'food recall'. Hawkes, Mintel (2004),As at least 65 per cent of food purchase decisions are made
in-store, food labels are clearly intended to influence consumption choices at point of purchase by
providing information relevant to the decision in hand. They combine size, color, images and
informative Packaging can also directly reinforce advertising and other brand
communications, and stimulate an interpretation of the meaning of these communications in
relation to these and other associations already stored in consumers' minds. The meaning a
consumer ascribes to a food can be related to a variety of different attributes the food is perceived
to possess, such as a particular health or social value. Dimara Efthalia, Skuras Dimitris (2005)
The purpose of this work is to examine the range of information consumers seek on labels of
quality products and construct an indicative check-list of various types of informational packaging
as well as to examine whether quality of information demanded segregates the market-creating
segments to be targeted by firms. The study records the range of informational packaging sought
by consumers as well as critical factors influencing their consuming behavior. Informational
packaging linking product to place ranks top among a wide set of information sought on labels. A
Poisson count data model reveals that consumers’ willingness to acquire information from labels
is influenced by various socio-economic characteristics and, in general, high demand for
information is associated with higher expenditures for wine. Singla Manisha (2010) Nutritional
packaging of food products is not mandatory in India at present and the Indian Government is on
the verge of introducing a code of conduct for it. The aim of this paper is to provide some initial
guidelines for the above-said purpose so as to have consumer friendly packaging policies. Food
labels are read by the consumers for brand comparisons and not for consulting nutritional
information. Difficult terminology, small font size and inability to understand nutritional labels
are the major problems encountered by the consumers. Television, friends, magazines are
commonly used for assessing nutritional information. Labels are considered more consumers
friendly when benchmarks regarding serving size are provided. Income level, size of household,
number of children and age did not play a role in the usage of nutritional labels by the consumers.
Consumers with special dietary needs used nutritional labels regularly. A. Stuart Stephen (2010)
This pilot study for a larger research project aims to quantify and categories elements of food
label information and establishes an indicative physical relationship between mandatory and other
information thereby articulating the relative balance between information intended to inform

13
healthy dietary choices and that intended to perform other functions such as aiding purchase
decisions. Findings indicate the amount of available space on labels devoted to mandatory
information ranged between 17 and 31 per cent, whilst the amount allocated to commercial
information ranged between 18 and 45 per cent. Unoccupied space varies between 32 and 54 per
cent. This indicates there is an imbalance between mandatory and commercial information, with
the weighting in favour of the latter. Borin Norm, Obispo San Luis, Cerf C. Douglas (2011)
The purpose of this paper is to investigate the impact of different levels of environmental
information on key consumer metrics. More specifically, it aims to evaluate environmentally
benign products against those that have negative environmental impacts. The results show that
consumer perception of product quality, value, and purchase intentions does not differ
significantly between products with positive environmental messages and those without any
message. Products with positive environmental messages are viewed better than products with
negative environmental messages. It is also found that the impact of environmental information is
greater for consumable products.

14
 CHAPTER-3: Need, Objective, Scope & Methodology

Need of the study

SOURCE:- www.unifem.org.in/.../Punjab/Punjab%20A%20brief%20Profile.pdf -

Today consumers are more educated than previous 20 year as we seen in above table hence the
awareness of consumer about packaging information has increased. Thus the study is very useful
for food industry to understand the consumer buying behavior related to food products. Because
the literacy rate of Punjab in 1991 was 58.51% which increases in 2001 to 74.19% which is
showing there are great development of Punjab during census 1991 to 2001 in education because
it leads the whole development that’s why we feel the need of this study means people how much
become and what effect came due to literacy about their right and responsibility with respect to
purchasing of any food products.

15
Objective:-

• To know the factors which influence consumer’s learning after reading the packaging
information on food product.

Scope of the study

• The study has been conducted in Ludhiana, Jalandhar and Phagwara of Punjab

• It is decided to consider all malls in these places like big bazaar, vishal mega mart, easy
day, where can easily find out the respondent for the survey.

16
 Research methodology

Research in common parlance refers to a search for knowledge. One can also define research as a
scientific and systematic search for pertinent information on a specific topic. According to
Clifford Woody1 research comprises defining and redefining problems, formulating hypothesis
or suggested solutions; collecting, organizing and evaluating data; making deductions and
reaching conclusions; and at last carefully testing the conclusions to determine whether they fit
the formulating hypothesis.

Research design

The study- The study was descriptive in nature with survey method being used to complete the
study because this research is the most commonly used and the basic reason for carrying out
descriptive research is to identify the consumer learning through the information given on food
products. Descriptive research is also called Statistical Research. And it describes data and
characteristics about the population or phenomenon being studied. Descriptive research answers
the questions who, what, where, when and how.

The main goal of this type of research is to describe the data and characteristics about what is
being studied. Here we are also going to find out the effect of packaging information on
consumer learning with respect to food product.

1
- CLIFFORD WOODY Professor of Education, University of Michigan

17
Sampling design:

• Population

Population of research was the people of various cities of Punjab (Ludhiana, Jalandhar
and Phagwara).

• Sample size

A sample of “500” consumers of Punjab (100 respondent from Ludhiana, 200 respondent
from Jalandhar and 200 respondent from Phagwara) are taken for the purpose of study
and analysis.

• Sampling unit:

Sample unit of study was the area of Ludhiana, Phagwara and jullundhar, and in sample
unit it is decided to consider the mall of these areas which named as vishal mega mart, big
bazaar, and easy day.

• Sample element:

The sample element was the each and every consumer who purchasing packed food
products in the organized mall in various cities of Punjab like Ludhiana, Phagwara and
Jalandhar.

• Sampling technique

18
 The sampling technique has been used Simple random sampling technique for choosing
the various cities of Punjab that is Ludhiana, Phagwara, and Jalandhar.

The quota sampling has been used for dividing the number of respondent in the selected
city (Ludhiana, Phagwara, and jullundhar) 100 respondent from Ludhiana, 200
respondents from Jalandhar and 200 respondents from Phagwara.

The Convenience sampling technique has been used for collecting the data conveniently
from the mall of selected cities of Punjab for the survey.

Data collection:

Data was collected through primary and secondary sources.

• Primary data:

Primary data was collected with the help of structured questionnaire and personal
interview with consumers.

• Secondary data:

Source of secondary data was collected with help of published, journals and magazines,
the websites.

• Method of data analysis:

Analysis of data is a process of inspecting, cleaning, transforming, and modeling data with
the goal of highlighting useful information, suggestion, and supporting decision making.
And for analysis of collected data we will use SPSS, Microsoft excel.

19
 HYPOTHESIS

Null hypothesis

H0- all variable have same effect on consumer learning with respect to food packaging
information

Alternative hypothesis
H1 – all variable don’t have same effect on consumer learning with respect to food
packaging information.

Factor analysis

20
 KMO and Bartlett's Test

Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling

.807
Adequacy.

Bartlett's Test of Approx. Chi-Square 3.294E3

Sphericity
Df 210

Sig. .000

Communalities

Initial Extraction

respondent's view about mfg. date. 1.000 .657

respondent's view about exp. date. 1.000 .728

respondent's view about price. 1.000 .702

respondent's view about weight. 1.000 .745

respondent's view regarding isi mark. 1.000 .658

respondent's view regarding batch no. 1.000 .734

respondent's view regading packaging date. 1.000 .442

respondent's view regarding content detail. 1.000 .402

respondent's view regarding company name. 1.000 .621

respondent's view regarding product name. 1.000 .723

respondent's view regarding company tag line. 1.000 .658

respondent's view regarding logo of brand. 1.000 .663

respondent's view regarding contact no. & website. 1.000 .642

respondent's view regarding tax detail. 1.000 .655

respondent's view regarding nutritional facts. 1.000 .539

respondent's view regarding trade mark. 1.000 .644

respondent's view regarding term and condition. 1.000 .677

respondent's view regarding food grade. 1.000 .582

respondent's view regarding vege or non vage segment. 1.000 .495

respondent's view regarding mfg. address. 1.000 .585

respondent's view regarding way of using. 1.000 .494

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.

21
22
 Total Variance Explained

Extraction Sums of Squared Rotation Sums of Squared

Initial Eigenvalues Loadings Loadings

Componen % of Cumulative % of Cumulative % of Cumulative

t Total Variance % Total Variance % Total Variance %

1 4.576 21.790 21.790 4.576 21.790 21.790 2.820 13.429 13.429

2 3.235 15.403 37.193 3.235 15.403 37.193 2.264 10.779 24.208

3 1.755 8.358 45.551 1.755 8.358 45.551 2.252 10.723 34.931

4 1.301 6.195 51.746 1.301 6.195 51.746 2.049 9.757 44.688

5 1.121 5.336 57.082 1.121 5.336 57.082 2.031 9.673 54.361

6 1.059 5.045 62.127 1.059 5.045 62.127 1.631 7.765 62.127

7 .937 4.460 66.587

8 .769 3.663 70.250

9 .706 3.364 73.614

10 .661 3.150 76.764

11 .637 3.033 79.797

12 .595 2.835 82.632

13 .523 2.493 85.124

14 .505 2.404 87.529

15 .461 2.195 89.724

16 .441 2.099 91.823

17 .411 1.955 93.778

18 .397 1.891 95.669

19 .342 1.626 97.295

20 .312 1.485 98.781

21 .256 1.219 100.000

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.

23
Analysis:-
Screen plot shows the eigenvalues against the component number. It means it also shows
extraction of that factor which eigenvalues is at least 1 or greater than 1. So by the above screen
plot we can say we have got six factors among all 21 components which eigenvalues is greater
than 1.

24
 Component Matrix

Component

1 2 3 4 5 6

respondent's view about mfg.

.531 -.509 -.100 -.272 .179 .009
date.

respondent's view about exp.

.445 -.621 -.093 -.348 .115 .016
date.

respondent's view about price. .435 -.449 -.084 .308 .216 .404

respondent's view about

.492 -.067 -.182 .555 .320 .232
weight.

respondent's view regarding

.481 .049 -.319 -.336 .428 -.162
isi mark.

respondent's view regarding

.469 .552 -.120 .117 .342 -.257
batch no.

respondent's view regarding

.596 -.137 -.070 -.233 -.093 .024
packaging date.

respondent's view regarding

.574 .210 .069 .023 .137 -.069
content detail.

respondent's view regarding

.434 -.324 .567 -.007 .055 -.060
company name.

respondent's view regarding

.315 -.388 .679 -.105 .035 .029
product name.

respondent's view regarding

.321 .455 .474 .075 .124 .318
company tag line.

respondent's view regarding

.418 .435 .395 -.310 -.023 .217
logo of brand.

respondent's view regarding

.367 .639 .285 .110 -.077 .000
contact no. & website.

respondent's view regarding

.442 .543 -.379 .088 .040 .112
tax detail.

respondent's view regarding

.643 -.034 -.128 .099 -.296 -.103
nutritional facts.

respondent's view regarding

.514 .297 -.276 -.432 -.166 .039
trade mark.

respondent's view regarding

.374 .283 -.188 -.062 -.480 .433
term and condition.

respondent's view regarding

.570 -.098 -.032 .163 -.357 -.303
25
 Component Matrix

Component

1 2 3 4 5 6

respondent's view about mfg.

.531 -.509 -.100 -.272 .179 .009
date.

respondent's view about exp.

.445 -.621 -.093 -.348 .115 .016
date.

respondent's view about price. .435 -.449 -.084 .308 .216 .404

respondent's view about

.492 -.067 -.182 .555 .320 .232
weight.

respondent's view regarding

.481 .049 -.319 -.336 .428 -.162
isi mark.

respondent's view regarding

.469 .552 -.120 .117 .342 -.257
batch no.

respondent's view regarding

.596 -.137 -.070 -.233 -.093 .024
packaging date.

respondent's view regarding

.574 .210 .069 .023 .137 -.069
content detail.

respondent's view regarding

.434 -.324 .567 -.007 .055 -.060
company name.

respondent's view regarding

.315 -.388 .679 -.105 .035 .029
product name.

respondent's view regarding

.321 .455 .474 .075 .124 .318
company tag line.

respondent's view regarding

.418 .435 .395 -.310 -.023 .217
logo of brand.

respondent's view regarding

.367 .639 .285 .110 -.077 .000
contact no. & website.

respondent's view regarding

.442 .543 -.379 .088 .040 .112
tax detail.

respondent's view regarding

.643 -.034 -.128 .099 -.296 -.103
nutritional facts.

respondent's view regarding

.514 .297 -.276 -.432 -.166 .039
trade mark.

respondent's view regarding

.374 .283 -.188 -.062 -.480 .433
term and condition.

respondent's view regarding

.570 -.098 -.032 .163 -.357 -.303
26
27
 Rotated Component Matrix

Component

1 2 3 4 5 6

respondent's view about

-.080 .694 .259 .237 -.018 .214
mfg. date.

respondent's view about

-.233 .715 .270 .260 -.046 .143
exp. date.

respondent's view about

-.131 .234 .204 .177 .038 .746
price.

respondent's view about

.288 .058 .184 -.045 .009 .789
weight.

respondent's view regarding

.378 .701 -.047 -.128 .012 .074
isi mark.

respondent's view regarding

.818 .141 -.032 -.162 .080 .106
batch no.

respondent's view regarding

.105 .462 .326 .150 .292 .062
packaging date.

respondent's view regarding

.501 .213 .145 .148 .201 .149
content detail.

respondent's view regarding

.106 .148 .240 .719 -.047 .103
company name.

respondent's view regarding

-.044 .124 .138 .827 -.033 .044
product name.

respondent's view regarding

.423 -.195 -.239 .404 .432 .183
company tag line.

respondent's view regarding

.367 .086 -.168 .389 .572 -.117
logo of brand.

respondent's view regarding

.619 -.242 -.006 .147 .421 -.048
contact no. & website.

respondent's view regarding

.506 .100 .034 -.390 .443 .201
tax detail.

respondent's view regarding

.239 .191 .596 .016 .279 .111
nutritional facts.

respondent's view regarding

.255 .446 .134 -.165 .552 -.174
trade mark.

respondent's view regarding

-.016 -.027 .223 -.149 .773 .080
term and condition.

28
 Rotated Component Matrix

Component

1 2 3 4 5 6

respondent's view about

-.080 .694 .259 .237 -.018 .214
mfg. date.

respondent's view about

-.233 .715 .270 .260 -.046 .143
exp. date.

respondent's view about

-.131 .234 .204 .177 .038 .746
price.

respondent's view about

.288 .058 .184 -.045 .009 .789
weight.

respondent's view regarding

.378 .701 -.047 -.128 .012 .074
isi mark.

respondent's view regarding

.818 .141 -.032 -.162 .080 .106
batch no.

respondent's view regarding

.105 .462 .326 .150 .292 .062
packaging date.

respondent's view regarding

.501 .213 .145 .148 .201 .149
content detail.

respondent's view regarding

.106 .148 .240 .719 -.047 .103
company name.

respondent's view regarding

-.044 .124 .138 .827 -.033 .044
product name.

respondent's view regarding

.423 -.195 -.239 .404 .432 .183
company tag line.

respondent's view regarding

.367 .086 -.168 .389 .572 -.117
logo of brand.

respondent's view regarding

.619 -.242 -.006 .147 .421 -.048
contact no. & website.

respondent's view regarding

.506 .100 .034 -.390 .443 .201
tax detail.

respondent's view regarding

.239 .191 .596 .016 .279 .111
nutritional facts.

respondent's view regarding

.255 .446 .134 -.165 .552 -.174
trade mark.

respondent's view regarding

-.016 -.027 .223 -.149 .773 .080
term and condition.

29
 Component Transformation Matrix

Compo
nent 1 2 3 4 5 6

1 .483 .466 .491 .253 .385 .309

2 .648 -.340 -.361 -.293 .439 -.234

3 .111 -.342 -.134 .909 -.022 -.163

4 .191 -.641 .315 -.116 -.275 .604

5 .336 .365 -.613 .068 -.454 .409

6 -.429 -.077 -.367 .081 .614 .540

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.

Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization.

30
 CHAPTER-4: Analysis and interpretation

We have used factor analysis test to analyze the data which is collected through the survey. Factor
analysis is used for data reduction and summarization. As we have used 21 variables for our study
that is to know the factors which influence consumer’s learning after reading the packaging
information on food product, and after applying the factor analysis on the collected data we
reduced them into six factors which are obtained by gathering together the variables that have
high correlation into one factor. The output tables of the factor analysis are shown below.

For applying the factor analysis test first of all need of apply the Bartlett’s test of sphericity or the
Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) test on collected data to measure the sampling adequacy which will
tell us about the correlation between the variables. If the correlations between the variables are
small, it means less than 0.5 than factor analysis may not be appropriate for that data. It means the
value of KMO to measure of sampling adequacy should be greater than 0.5 in order to run factor
analysis appropriately but in the case of our study it came out 0.807 which shows the data is
appropriate for applying the factor analysis. Also the Bartlett’s test statistics was significant i.e.
we rejected the null hypothesis which stated that there is no correlation between the variables.
Principle component factor analysis was used which considers the total variance in the data. Then
the factors were chosen based on Eigen values associated with them which must be at least 1.00.
Varimax procedure was used to obtain rotated component matrix in which it is considered that
entire variable which value came out more than 0.5 and through it we have gathered all derived
variable under 6 factors. From the correlation matrix we can see that the variables combined
under one factor have high correlation. The commonality for a variable indicates the variance in
the variables that is explained by the six factors obtained.

31
The factors obtained from the analysis are as follows:

FACTORS VARIABLES
• batch no
• Manufacturing attribute • content detail
• Contact no. & website
• tax detail
• manufacturing address

• ISI mark
• Standardized product • exp. Date
• manufacturing date

• nutritional fact
• food grade
• veg or non-veg segment
• Product detail • way of using

• product name
• Brand detail • company name

• logo of the brand

• Legal attributes • trade mark
• term & condition

• weight
• Product value • price

32
Our null hypothesis is rejected because all factors do not have same effect on the consumer
learning with respect of food packet. And our alternative hypothesis is selected and we conclude
that: -

The output of the factor analysis is obtained by requesting the principle component analysis. We
get the output comprises the communality for all 21 variables and the Eigen value of the factor
which have Eigen value of 1 or more than 1. The first step in interpreting the output is to look at
the factor extracted. The last column of table of total variance shows that the six factor extracted
together account for 62.127% or 62% of total variance this is good deal because with only six
factor. I have lost only about 37.873% or 38% of the information content while 62% is retain by
the six factors extracted out of the 21 original variables.

The first factor which named as manufacturing attribute identifies with variables like (batch no,
content detail, contact no. & website, tax detail and manufacturing address). The second factor
which named as standardized product identifies with variable like (ISI mark, exp. date,
manufacturing date), third factor which named as product detail identifies with variable like
(nutritional fact, food grade, veg or non-veg segment and way of using), Fourth factor which
named as brand detail identifies with variable like (product name and company name), Fifth
factor which named as legal attributes identifies with variable like (logo of the brand, trade mark
and term & condition), and six factor that named as product value identifies with variable like
(weight and price).

33
THE DESCRIPTIVE ANALYSIS OF THE DEMOGRAPHIC OF THE SAMPLE FROM
THE DATA COLLECTED CAN BE SHOWN BY THE BAR GRAPHS BELOW:

• Age group :-

Age Total Percentage

18 – 21 73 14.6%
22 - 35 291 58.2%
36 – 45 109 21.8%
45 – above 27 5.4%
500 100%

Analysis

The above table and bar graph showing the Age of the respondents those who participated in the
survey According to the analyzed bar graph, the findings conclude that almost 58% of the
respondents of our survey belongs to 22-35 age group, 22% of survey come under 36-45, 15% of
survey come in under 18-21 and above 45are only 5%.

34
 • Gender :-

Gender Total Percentage

Male 409 81.8%
Female 91 18.2%
500 100%

Analysis

The above table and pie chart showing the gender of the respondents those who participated in the
survey According to the analyzed pie chart, the findings conclude that almost 82% of the
respondents of our survey is male and 18% of our Respondent of our survey is female.

35
 • Occupation:-

Occupation Total Percentage

Student 223 44.6%
Self employed 125 25%
salaried 105 21%
Any other 47 9.4%
500 100%

Analysis
The above table and bar graph showing the occupation of the respondents those who participated
in the survey and it is showing the occupation of respondent. According to the analyzed bar
graph, the findings conclude that student are the bigger part of our respondent because they are
total 44.60% , than self employed which is 25% , salaried 21% and the person who are not
student, not self employed, not salaried that is 9.40%.

36
 • Income own or family (p/month.):-

Details Total Percentage

15000-20000 88 17.6%
20000-30000 257 51.4%
30000-35000 94 18.8%
35000-above 61 12.2%
500 100%

Analysis
The above table and bar graph showing the income of the respondents in which we analyzed that
the most people income is 20000-30000 that is 51% total of our respondent and after that people
are belonging to 30000-35000 that is 19%, 18% people of our respondent income have 15000-
20000 and 12% have above 35000.

37
 • Are you aware about information given on food packet?

Total Percentage
Yes 500 100%
No 0 0%
500 100%

Analysis:

The above table and pie chart showing the awareness of the respondents those who participated in
the survey According to the analyzed pie chart, the findings come out that all respondents (100%)
of our survey is aware about the information given on food packet.

38
 • If yes how did you come to know?

Total Percentage
By food packet 297 59.4%
By dept. of consumer affair 131 26.2%
Awareness programme by the govt. 53 10.6%
Any other media. 19 3.8%
500 100%

Analysis
The above table and bar graph showing the source by which respondent get aware about the food
packaging information in which we analyzed that the most people got awareness, by food packet
that is 59% total of our respondent and after that 26% respondent have told “they got awareness
by department of consumer affair”. 11% got awareness by govt. awareness programme and 4%
told by any other media.

39
 • Do you check the information given on food packet before purchase?

Total Percentage
Yes 500 100%
No 0 0%
500 100%

Analysis:

The above table and pie chart showing the how much percentage of total respondents are
checking the packaging information given on food product. According to the analyzed pie chart,
the findings come out that all respondents (100%) of our survey is checking the packaging
information before purchasing of food product.

40
 • Do you recommend others to check for the information on food packet before
purchasing?

Total Percentage
Yes 500 100%
No 0 0%
500 100%

Analysis:

The above table and pie chart showing the loyalty of respondents towards packaging information
of food product. According to the analyzed pie chart, the findings come out that all respondents
(100%) of the survey are loyal towards packaging information of food product.

41
 CHAPTER-5: findings, Conclusion, Limitations &
Recommendations

Findings:

After analyzing the response of the consumer interviewing through questionnaire and observation
the following were found in the study.

• The study shows the people of Punjab really health Conesus.

• Packaging information plays important role to make purchase decision of customer.

• The mostly consumers check the content detail, nutritional facts and the way of using.

• The packaging information is significantly effect on consumer learning.

• The most important thing is all respondents are aware about the food packet information.

• All respondents are checking packaging information at the time of purchasing food
products.

42
Conclusion:

• This study was carrying out with the objective of to know the factors which influence
consumer’s learning after reading the packaging information on food product, and on the
basis of survey we analyzed the result by which we can say packaging information plays a
vital role to get learn consumer about the food product related information. And now
today’s consumer are more health conscious that’s why they check information which is
very necessary in the case of food products like nutritional facts, packaging date, expire
date, and way of using that’s why we can say, really food packet information effect on
consumer learning.

43
Limitation of the study:

 Money was the greatest limitations in carrying out the surveys.

 The sampling was of convenience sampling, where the error could be of the highest level.

 The sample size was 500 which can not represent the taste of a large no. of population.

 The answer given by the respondents believe as true statement.

 The response given by customers may be in botherness by some other factors.

 The respondents in many cases were hesitant to give exact information.

 Some facts cannot be represented in statistical form which is also a drawback.

 Some questions were of subjective nature and could not be included in the interpretation.

44
Recommendation:

After analyzing the facts and by talking to the people following suggestions came out: -

1. The information provided by companies on food packet, the font size is much smaller
which is not seen clearly to all therefore companies should give it in appropriate size for
clear view to all on food packet.

2. The 2nd most important thing is that in some cases abbreviation are used for few words that
is not understandable to some people. So there should be full name must be given with
abbreviation, if it is use.

3. During conversation with respondents many of them said that in some product they were
not able to find the information easily due to the information is given in some case at the
bottom of the packet, in some case at the upper side of the packet, and sometime they did
not find the information that is useful to them. So therefore companies should try to give it
at a fixed place every time which can be found by the customer easily.

45
 4. The information provided by companies on food packet, should be in contrast and deep
color for the purpose of visibility.

5. The language used for packaging information should be simple and the easily
understandable by customers.

Reference:

• Drichoutis, Andreas C.et.al (2006) “Consumers’ Use of Nutritional Labels: A Review of

Research Studies and Issues” Academy of Marketing Science Review; Vol. 5 pg. 1 ISSN
15261794.
• Petra Tenbült, Nanne De Vries, et.al (2007) “Effects of packaging on information
processing” British Food Journal; Vol.109, Iss. 4; pg. 305.
• Hilary Oliver (2008) “Nutrition labels get more attention” Natural Foods Merchandiser;
Vol. 29, Iss. 9; pg. 1, 1 pgs
• Alan Osborn (2009) “EU pushes ahead with additives and packaging legislation for food
and drinks sectors” Management briefing: Food information, just - Drinks. Bromsgrove;
pg. 7, 6 pgs

46
 • Jennie Feight, Nashat Zuraikat (2009) “Cloned food packaging: history, issues, and
bills”; International Journal of Pharmaceutical and Healthcare Marketing; Vol. 3, Iss.2;
pg. 149
• Devson.c (2010)”Health Care, Hospitals; Nutritional Packaging and Point-of-Purchase
Signs Influence Healthy Food Choices” Biotech Business Week; vol.4 pg. 1069.
• Kala Vijayraghavan, Ratna Bhushan (2009) “Food cos have a label solution” Tribune
Business News Washington.
• Jennie Feight, Nashat Zuraikat (2009) “Cloned food packaging: history, issues, and bill
S” International Journal of Pharmaceutical and Healthcare Marketing. Vol. 3, Iss. 2; pg.
149
• Hawkes, Mintel (2004) “Food and nutrition information: a study of sources, uses, and
understanding", British Food Journal; Vol. 99 No.2, pp.43-99.
• Dimara Efthalia,Skuras Dimitris (2005) “Consumer demand for informative packaging
of quality food and drink products: a European Union case study” Journal of Consumer
Marketing, vol. 22 No:2, pp:90-100 ISSN 0736-3761.

Singla Manisha (2010) “Usage and understanding of food and nutritional labels among Indian
consumers”, British Food Journal; Vol. 112,No:1, pp:83-92.

Stuart Stephen (2010) “The relationship between mandatory and other food label information”,
British Food Journal; Vol: 112, No:1, pp:21-31.
• Borin Norm, Obispo San Luis, Cerf C. Douglas (2011) “Consumer effects of
environmental impact in product packaging”, Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 28,
Number:1, pp:76-86, ISSN:0736-376.

47
Important URL

• http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?
did=1135733971&sid=5&Fmt=3&clientId=129893&RQT=309&VName=PQD

• http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?
did=1247925731&sid=3&Fmt=3&clientId=129893&RQT=309&VName=PQD
• http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?
did=1586878461&sid=3&Fmt=3&clientId=129893&RQT=309&VName=PQD
• http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?
did=1667078001&sid=3&Fmt=3&clientId=129893&RQT=309&VName=PQD

• http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?
did=1882768001&sid=5&Fmt=3&clientId=129893&RQT=309&VName=PQD

48
 • http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?
did=2106903691&sid=1&Fmt=3&clientId=129893&RQT=309&VName=PQD
• http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?
did=1786790621&sid=3&Fmt=3&clientId=129893&RQT=309&VName=PQD
• http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?
did=1882768001&sid=3&Fmt=3&clientId=129893&RQT=309&VName=PQD
• http://www.emeraldinsight.com/order_form.htm?ref=Abbott,%20R.%20+%281997%29+
%22Food%20and%20nutrition%20information:%20a%20study%20of%20sources,
%20uses,%20and%20understanding%22%2C+British%20Food%20Journal
%2C+Vol.99+No.2+pp43-9
• http://www.emeraldinsight.com/journals.htm?articleid=1463998&show=abstract
• http://www.emeraldinsight.com/journals.htm?articleid=1834393&show=abstract
• http://www.emeraldinsight.com/journals.htm?articleid=1834388&show=abstract
• http://www.emeraldinsight.com/journals.htm?articleid=1905617&show=abstract

APPENDIX

QUESTIONNAIRE

• Name: - …………………………………………………………..

• City: - …………………………………………………………….

• Age group : -

18 – 21 22 – 35

36 – 45 45 – above

• Gender :-

49
 Male female

• Occupation:-

Student Self Employed

Salaried If any other

Than specify …………………………………………..

• Income own or family (p/month.):-

15000-20000 20000-30000

30000-35000 35000-above

1. Are you aware about information given on food packet?

Yes No (If no than go question no 7)

1(a).If yes how did you come to know?

By food packet by dept. of consumer affair

Awareness programme any other media

By the govt

Than specify……………………………………………………...

2. Do you check the information given on food packet before purchase?

Yes No (If no than go question no 8)

50
 2(a).If yes than how often?

Always sometime

Often

3. Which information of food packet affects your learning more before purchasing? (please rate
according to yourself 1 to 5)

1- Definitely agree, 2- Probably agree, 3- Might or might not, 4- Probably not agree, 5-
Definitely not agree.

Sr. Factors 1 2 3 4 5
No
1. I would buy food product only after seeing the manufacturing date on the
product.
2. I would buy food product only after seeing the expiry date on the product.

3. I would buy food product only after seeing the price on the product.
4. I would buy food product only after seeing the weight on the product.

5. I would buy food product only after seeing the ISI mark on the product.

6. I would buy food product only after seeing the batch no. on the product.

7. I would buy food product only after seeing the packaging date on the
product.
8. I would buy food product only after seeing the content detail on the product.
9. I would buy food product only after seeing the company name on the
product.
10. I would buy food product only after seeing the product name on the product.
11. I would buy food product only after seeing the company tag line on the
product.
12. I would buy food product only after seeing the logo of brand on the product.
13. I would buy food product only after seeing the contact no. & website on the
product.
14. I would buy food product only after seeing the tax detail on the product.
15. I would buy food product only after seeing the nutritional facts on the
product.
16. I would buy food product only after seeing trade mark on the product.

17. I would buy food product only after seeing the term & condition on the
product.
18. I would buy food product only after seeing the food grade on the product.
19. I would buy food product only after seeing the vegetarian. Or non-
vegetarian segment on the product.
51
20. I would buy food product only after seeing the manufacturing address on
the product.
21. I would buy food product only after seeing the way of using on the product.
4. Do you think the information given on food packet is useful?

Beneficial up to some extent

Not beneficial

5. What makes you unaware about information given on food packet?

Less advertisement less publicity

Never mind not shopping

6. Why don’t you check the information given on food packet before purchasing?

No need Unimportant

Others cause

Please specify…………………………………

7. Do you recommend others to check for the information on food packet before purchasing?

Yes No

8. Please share your any other feelings about food packet information.

___________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________

THANKS FOR CO-OPERATION.

52