SOKOLOVA, KRISHNA, AND D € ORING
469
overpackaged, with layers of superfluous packaging added to the more necessary ones. Examples of overpackaged products can be found across product categories and geo- graphic markets (table 1). For example, Nivea sells body lotion packaged in plastic and cardboard boxes, even though a similar product from the same brand is available in plastic tubes only. By the same token, Sensodyne tooth- paste is commonly sold in plastic tubes with additional paper packaging, while the same brand already sells tooth- paste without paper boxes. We present a more extensive list of examples of overpackaging in web appendix A. Besides specific brands engaging in overpackaging, there are entire product categories where addition of layers of superfluous packaging is common. Breakfast cereal is often packaged first in plastic bags and then in cardboard boxes; plastic yogurt multipacks are covered with addi- tional cardboard sleeves; and skincare products are placed within paper boxes. In this article, we examine consumer responses to product overpackaging, focusing on consumer perceptions of plastic packaging versus plastic packaging
with additional paper packaging (i.e., plastic-plus-paper packaging). We argue and show empirically that consumers tend to perceive overpackaged products, wrapped in plastic plus paper, as having more environmentally friendly packaging than their plastic-only-wrapped counterparts. We refer to this effect as the perceived environmental friendliness (PEF) bias. We demonstrate that the PEF bias is driven by consumers’ “paper ¼ good, plastic ¼ bad” beliefs and by proportional reasoning, wherein packaging with a greater paper-to-plastic proportion is judged as more environmen- tally friendly. As a result of this evaluation process, hold- ing the amount of plastic in product packaging fixed, adding more paper to it leads to higher perceived environ- mental friendliness, even though objective environmental friendliness decreases. Importantly, the PEF bias has downstream consequences for consumers’ willingness to pay and product choice, such that consumers are willing to pay more for products packaged with additional layers of paper and are more likely to choose them compared to their
TABLE1
EXAMPLES OF PLASTIC-PLUS-PAPER- AND PLASTIC-PACKAGED PRODUCTS
NOTES .—Packaging examples from different grocery stores and pharmacies. Each row features four different pairs of products where the left product is packaged in plastic plus paper and the right product is packaged in plastic only.
Made with FlippingBook flipbook maker