This study evaluates how sensory claims influence consumer perception and acceptance of cachaça, indicating potential marketing strategies.
This study evaluated the impact of sensory claims on cachaça labels regarding consumer perception and sensory acceptance using complementary techniques: Text highlighting (TH), rate‐all‐that‐apply (RATA), and acceptance testing. A total of 117 consumers participated in the study, evaluating three experimental label versions (no claim, textual sensory claim, and sensory wheel claim) applied to a single commercial sample of oak barrel‐aged cachaça. An initial online questionnaire characterized participants' sociodemographic profiles, consumption habits, and preferences. In the experimental phase, the TH technique was employed to identify which graphical and textual elements most influenced consumer perception. Subsequently, sensory evaluation was conducted using RATA and hedonic scaling. Participants were predominantly young adults (18–28 years, 79.5%) with occasional consumption frequency (72%). Results showed high consumer engagement with the TH technique (highlighting rates: 17.9% to 83.8%) and a predominance of positive sentiment. Sensory claims, especially in textual format, significantly increased consumer engagement and positive evaluations. The textual claim also reduced negative perceptions (e.g., alcoholic and harsh flavors) while enhancing desirable attributes (e.g., sweet aroma, woody notes), resulting in a significantly higher acceptability score (6.53) compared to the sample without a claim (5.99; p < 0.05). This integrated approach highlights the influence of extrinsic information on sensory perception and underscores the role of label design in shaping consumer behavior. The findings support the use of sensory marketing strategies to enhance product positioning and offer insights for labeling practices and regulatory frameworks.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Galdino et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: