In recent years, several brands have received much negative press coverage when trying to market their food and drink products specifically at women. This is, in part, because the taste preferences/sensitivities of men and women are actually quite similar. In fact, perhaps the one and only area where consumers are willing to accept (or should that be swallow) ingested products explicitly targeted at women or men is in the case of nutritional foods/supplements. Such products are not really sold on the basis of their taste/flavour anyway. Many consumers are also sensitive to the so-called pink tax, when near-identical products cost more when sold to women rather than to men (e.g., as in the case of female razors). As the four recent examples discussed in this review make clear, it can be difficult to roll-out a new food or beverage product, or else extend a pre-existing product line, that is especially for women without coming across as sexist/condescending. As such, marketers need to tread carefully, otherwise they may end-up generating unwanted negative publicity. Ultimately, therefore, adopting an implicit approach to gender-based marketing, should that be the direction that a brand wants to take, will likely have more chance of avoiding negative publicity than the explicit targeting of food/beverage-related products in what is undoubtedly a highly-politicized area.

In recent years, food and drink marketers have become increasingly interested in the question of whether there are any meaningful sex/gender differences in the world of taste/flavour perception. However, it turns out that while there are a large number of individual differences in the experience of food/drink, few, if any, fall neatly along sex/gender lines. As such, the marketers of food and drink need to tread very carefully when it comes to marketing food or beverage products specifically at men, or more usually, women. All too often, the brands entering this space soon find their attempts branded crass and/or sexist. Adopting a stealthy or implicit gender-based product development strategy is therefore perhaps more likely to succeed than the explicit targeting of food/beverage-related products in what is undoubtedly a highly-politicized area. That said, the one area where the public appear willing to accept products that are explicitly targeted at men or women is in the case of nutritional foods/supplements.

People often say that beer tastes better from a bottle than from a can. However, one can ask whether this perceived difference is reliable across consumers; And, if so, whether it is purely a psychological phenomenon (associated with the influence of packaging on taste perception), or whether instead it reflects some more mundane physico-chemical interaction between the packaging material (or packing procedure/process) and the contents. We conducted two experiments in order to address these important questions. In the main experiment, 151 participants at the 2016 Edinburgh Science Festival were served a beer in a plastic cup. The beer was either poured from a bottle or can (i.e., a between-participants experimental design was used) and the participants were encouraged to pick up the packaging in order to inspect the label before tasting the beer. The participants rated the perceived taste, quality, and freshness of the beer, as well as their likelihood of purchase, and their estimate of the price. All of the beer came from the same batch (from Barney’s Brewery in Edinburgh). Nevertheless, those who evaluated the bottled beer rated it as tasting better than those who rated the beer that had been served from a can. Having demonstrated such a perceptual difference in terms of taste, we then went on to investigate whether people would prefer one packaging format over the other when the beer from bottle and can was served to a new group of participants blind (i.e., when the participants did not know the packaging material). The participants in this control study (N = 29) were asked which beer they preferred or else could state that the two samples tasted the same. No sign of preference was obtained under such conditions. Explanations for the psychological impact of the packaging format, in terms of differences in packaging weight (between tin and glass), and/or prior associations of quality with specific packaging materials/formats (what some have chosen to call ‘image molds’) are discussed.