Skip to main content
PLOS One logoLink to PLOS One
. 2025 Jun 16;20(6):e0326186. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0326186

Can anthropomorphic design in beverage packaging enhance impulse buying intention? Amazing visual and verbal cues!

Yuyang Tian 1, Siti Farhana Zakaria 1,*, Yinghui Du 2, Ye Qiu 3, Zenghui Tian 2
Editor: Simon Dang4
PMCID: PMC12169521  PMID: 40522940

Abstract

The anthropomorphic design of beverage packaging has gained significant attention as an innovative marketing strategy. This study systematically examines how anthropomorphic visual and verbal cues in beverage packaging influence consumers’ impulse buying intentions. Grounded in the Stimulus-Organism-Response model, Social Presence Theory, and Empathy Theory, the research employs a consumer survey to validate the mediating roles of positive emotions, social presence, and empathy in the relationship between anthropomorphic design and impulse buying intentions. A comprehensive causal model was developed to explore these relationships. While modern packaging techniques and visual elements enhance the appearance of beverage packaging, they did not significantly trigger empathetic responses. This suggests that emotional language and personalized expressions are more effective in fostering emotional resonance. The study also highlights the significant mediating roles of positive emotions and social presence in the relationship between anthropomorphic design and impulse buying intentions, emphasizing the importance of emotional and social factors in consumer decision-making.This research validates the theoretical model and offers practical insights for companies. It suggests that businesses should focus on consumers’ emotional needs and psychological states in packaging design and marketing strategies. By enhancing emotional language, optimizing visual anthropomorphic elements, and incorporating multi-sensory designs, companies can effectively improve consumers’ positive emotions and social presence, thereby increasing impulse buying intentions. For consumers with high levels of loneliness, strengthening anthropomorphic design elements can meet their social and emotional needs, enhancing brand loyalty and market competitiveness.

1 Introduction

In recent years, anthropomorphic design has emerged as a prominent marketing strategy, increasingly utilized in the modern consumer market, particularly in product packaging. By attributing human-like characteristics to products, anthropomorphic design in beverage packaging can evoke emotional resonance among consumers, enhancing their sense of identification with the product and stimulating purchase intentions. In the Chinese market, attractive packaging is a key design factor ranked among the top purchasing considerations. Compared to other factors such as flavor innovation and pricing, optimizing packaging design appears to be a cost-effective and rapidly impactful marketing approach. For instance, the packaging of Intermarché’s orange juice garnered 50 million media impressions within three hours of its launch, and sales surged by 4,600% within three weeks, with global in-store traffic increasing by 25% (DIGITALING). While the design strategy played a significant role, it is important to note that other factors such as brand awareness and promotional activities may have also contributed to this success. Similarly, VDA BANGKOK established TASTE&Co to implement innovative packaging designs, helping small-scale producers in Thailand expand their businesses (Sohu). The global beverage packaging market was valued at 138.72 billion in 2022 and is e‘xpected to grow to 204.53 billion by 2030, with a compound annual growth rate of 5.1% from 2023 to 2030 (DATA BRIDGE). This growth trend underscores the importance of innovative packaging design in driving market expansion.

These data suggest that anthropomorphic design in packaging can enhance consumers’ emotional identification and purchase intentions [1]. However, the psychological mechanisms underlying consumer behavior in response to anthropomorphic designs remain underexplored. Most existing studies focus on the impact of visual designs on consumers, such as cartoon patterns and anthropomorphic appearances, with limited attention given to the role of verbal cues in anthropomorphic beverage packaging designs. For example, whether anthropomorphic language styles influence consumer behavior through psychological mechanisms such as social presence, positive emotions, and empathy remains insufficiently explored [2]. Therefore, further research is needed to examine the roles of visual and verbal cues in anthropomorphic design and explore how these cues affect consumer behavior through complex psychological mediation mechanisms. Anthropomorphic design is a strategy that evokes emotional resonance in consumers by assigning human traits to products [3]. These traits include anthropomorphic elements in appearance, such as facial expressions and body shapes, as well as emotional and personality expressions conveyed through verbal communication. Despite its widespread application in marketing, the influence of anthropomorphic design on consumer purchase behavior through psychological mechanisms such as affective responses and cognitive evaluation remains underexplored [4]. Grounded in Affective Response Theory, this study examines how anthropomorphic design influences impulse buying intentions through emotional and cognitive pathways [5]. Affective Response Theory posits that consumers’ emotional reactions to stimuli, such as packaging design, play a critical role in shaping their behavioral responses.

This study incorporates Affective Response Theory into the framework of anthropomorphic design in beverage packaging, focusing on the roles of visual and verbal cues in evoking positive emotions, enhancing social presence, and driving purchase behavior [6]. Positive emotions play a crucial role in the impact pathway of anthropomorphic design [7]. Feelings of pleasure and satisfaction directly enhance a product’s appeal to consumers, making them more inclined to purchase immediately [8]. This study further analyzes how visual and verbal cues in anthropomorphic beverage packaging design influence impulse buying intentions through positive emotions and social presence. The findings aim to provide businesses with refined and emotionally driven packaging design and marketing strategies [9]. By revealing consumer purchasing behavior characteristics in different contexts, the study seeks to advance market design strategies, shifting from mere visual appeal to deeper emotional resonance and social connection. Ultimately, it aims to influence consumer impulse buying intentions through complex psychological mechanisms. Affective Response Theory plays a key role in understanding anthropomorphic design, revealing how anthropomorphic design influences impulse buying intentions through psychological mechanisms such as social presence, positive emotions, and empathy. According to this theory, affective responses s to stimuli are critical in shaping consumer behavior [10]. Anthropomorphic beverage packaging, which assigns human traits to products, enhances consumers’ emotional engagement. Consumers generally exhibit stronger affective responses to objects with human-like traits [11]. Grounded in Affective Response Theory, this study investigates how anthropomorphic design affects impulse buying intentions via emotional and cognitive pathways. Visual cues, such as facial expressions and anthropomorphic images, effectively capture consumer attention, fostering affinity, enhancing social presence, and evoking positive emotions. These emotions, in turn, drive impulse purchases [12]. Verbal cues, including emotional language and humor, convey product personality, eliciting empathy, strengthening emotional connections, and further boosting social presence and purchase intentions [13].

Globally, 54% of leading brands use anthropomorphic elements in packaging, with notable examples being M&M’s “spokescandies” and first-person language in product descriptions [14]. While visual cues exert a more immediate and pronounced impact, verbal cues produce deeper cognitive effects, shaping attitudes and beliefs [15]. This research emphasizes the distinct roles of visual and verbal cues, offering theoretical insights for packaging design and marketing strategies, aiding businesses in stimulating impulse buying behavior more effectively. Understanding these mechanisms in greater depth enables businesses to craft more effective marketing strategies and boost sales.

2 Theoretical background

2.1 Concept of impulse buying intention

Impulse buying intention refers to a consumer’s spontaneous and unplanned decision to purchase a product, often triggered by external stimuli [16]. This behavior is characterized by its immediacy, emotional intensity, and lack of deliberate evaluation. Unlike planned purchases, impulse buying is heavily influenced by emotional and environmental factors, making it a central focus in consumer behavior research. In the digital age, the convenience and immediacy of online shopping have further amplified impulse purchase intentions. Positive emotions, such as excitement or joy, play a significant role in enhancing these tendencies [17]. Environmental factors, including product displays, promotional activities, and packaging design, also exert a strong influence. For instance, Zafar et al. (2020) [18] demonstrated that anthropomorphic packaging—which assigns human-like traits to products—can evoke emotional resonance and amplify positive emotions, thereby increasing impulse purchase intentions. The Stimulus-Organism-Response (S-O-R) model provides a robust theoretical framework for understanding the formation of impulse purchase intentions. According to this model, external stimuli (S) influence an individual’s internal states (O), which in turn drive behavioral responses (R). In the context of this study, anthropomorphic beverage packaging serves as the external stimulus, utilizing visual and verbal cues to evoke emotional and cognitive responses in consumers. These internal responses, such as heightened positive emotions or a sense of social connection, then lead to increased impulse purchase intentions. The S-O-R model is particularly applicable to this research because it captures the dynamic interplay between environmental stimuli (e.g., anthropomorphic packaging), psychological processes (e.g., emotional resonance and trust), and behavioral outcomes (e.g., impulse buying). For example, Fang et al. (2022) [19] argue that weakened self-control, as explained by self-regulation theory, increases the likelihood of impulse buying. Emotional induction theory further suggests that positive emotions reduce self-control, making consumers more susceptible to impulsive decisions.

2.2 Affective response theory

Affective Response Theory In Affective Response Theory (ART), consumers’ emotional reactions to external stimuli play a crucial role in shaping their behavioral responses [20]. Affective responses are immediate and automatic reactions to stimuli, which subsequently influence cognitive evaluations and decision-making processes [21]. ART is widely applied in marketing and consumer behavior research to explain how emotional engagement with products, advertisements, or packaging designs drives consumer actions, such as purchase intentions and brand loyalty [22]. In the context of anthropomorphic design, ART provides a robust framework for understanding how human-like characteristics in product packaging evoke emotional resonance, thereby influencing consumer behavior [23]. By assigning human traits to products, anthropomorphic design creates a sense of social interaction and emotional connection, triggering affective responses that enhance consumers’ identification with the product and their willingness to purchase [24]. Anthropomorphic design often elicits feelings of pleasure, joy, and satisfaction. For example, facial expressions or playful language on beverage packaging can create a sense of friendliness and fun, enhancing consumers’ emotional engagement with the product [25]. Human-like traits in packaging design can evoke empathetic responses, making consumers feel a deeper emotional connection to the product. This empathy strengthens the emotional bond between the consumer and the product, increasing the likelihood of impulse purchases. Therefore, impulse buying is often driven by emotional factors rather than rational ones.

3 Hypotheses

3.1 Conceptual model

The conceptual model is shown as Fig 1:

Fig 1. Research model.

Fig 1

3.2 Anthropomorphic design in beverage packaging and impulse buying intention

Anthropomorphic beverage packaging assigns human-like traits to products using visual and verbal cues, significantly shaping consumers’ impulse buying intentions. Visual cues, including facial expressions and body shapes, effectively capture attention and evoke positive emotions. The S-O-R model proposed by Kumar et al. (2020) [26] identifies visual anthropomorphic elements as external stimuli that shape emotional states and drive purchasing behavior. Such elements enhance product appeal and affinity, fostering emotional resonance and triggering immediate purchase tendencies. Visual anthropomorphism also enhances social presence, fostering a sense of social connection between consumers and the product [27]. This connection reduces perceived risk, builds trust, and encourages impulse buying. Verbal cues, including emotional language and humor, convey product personality and elicit empathetic responses. Cognitive appraisal theory Anita et al. (2023) [28] suggests that emotional language shapes attitudes and beliefs via deep cognitive processing, reinforcing product acceptance and trust. Verbal anthropomorphism imbues products with “personality,” fostering emotional connections, amplifying positive emotions, lowering self-control, and boosting impulse purchases. Trust is a pivotal factor in both visual and verbal anthropomorphic design. According to Yturralde and Lazatin (2022) [29], consumers are more likely to trust products with human-like traits. Anthropomorphic design boosts product credibility, fostering a sense of safety and prompting quicker purchasing decisions. By reducing uncertainty and perceived risk, trust facilitates immediate purchasing decisions. Visual cues impact emotions through sensory stimuli, while verbal cues influence attitudes via cognitive processing. Combined, these cues work synergistically to promote impulse buying behavior. Thus, the hypotheses formulated as follows.

H1: Anthropomorphic design in beverage packaging (visual cues) positively influences impulse buying intention.

H2: Anthropomorphic design in beverage packaging (verbal cues) positively influences impulse buying intention.

3.3 Anthropomorphic design in beverage packaging and social presence

Social presence is a well-studied concept in consumer behavior research. Zhang and Wang (2023) [30] suggest that it is a crucial factor in understanding consumer psychology. This is especially true in online and virtual interactions. Anthropomorphic beverage packaging enhances social presence by giving products human-like traits. Social presence is defined as the perception of others’ presence and a sense of social connection during product interactions. Visual cues, such as facial expressions, body postures, and eye contact, mimic human appearance. These cues evoke consumers’ perception of interpersonal interactions [31]. Visual anthropomorphism creates the impression of interacting with a real person. This strengthens social presence. Social response theory states that humans exhibit social responses to non-human objects displaying social cues. Visual anthropomorphic elements provide these cues. They allow the product to be perceived as a social entity. Andika et al. (2023) [32] argue that verbal cues, such as emotional language, anthropomorphic dialogue, and humor, convey the product’s “personality” and emotions. These verbal elements foster empathy and enhance a sense of connection . Media richness theory suggests that emotional and personalized language enhances information richness. This, in turn, strengthens social presence. Increased social presence fulfills consumers’ social needs. This is particularly relevant for consumers experiencing loneliness [33]. It helps alleviate loneliness, improves mood, and triggers positive emotional responses. Enhanced social presence increases product likability and trust. This ultimately drives purchase intentions. Beverage packaging uses a variety of social cues through visual and verbal elements. These cues enhance social presence, meet social and emotional needs, and stimulate purchase intentions. Thus, the hypotheses formulated as follows.

H3: Anthropomorphic design in beverage packaging (visual cues) positively influences social presence.

H4: Anthropomorphic design in beverage packaging (verbal cues) positively influences social presence.

3.4 Social presence

Social presence, defined as the feeling of being with another person or entity in an intermediary environment, plays a crucial role in shaping consumer behavior [34] . When a product is designed with humanoid features, its social presence is enhanced, creating a sense of interaction and emotional connection [35]. Social presence can generate a sense of psychological intimacy, thereby enhancing consumers’ emotional engagement with products or brands [36] . In the context of anthropomorphic design, humanoid features such as facial expressions or verbal cues can simulate social interactions, thereby generating warmth, pleasure, and satisfaction. Research has shown that social presence in both digital and physical environments can significantly enhance positive emotions. A higher level of social presence in the e-commerce environment will increase consumers’ enjoyment and satisfaction. Similarly, social presence in website design has a positive impact on users’ affective responses, such as trust and happiness. In addition, social presence enhances the perceived interactivity and emotional appeal of products, which may lead to impulsive purchasing behavior [37]. When consumers feel connected to a product, they are more likely to make unplanned purchases. When consumers perceive products to have qualities similar to humans, they are more likely to resonate with them, thereby strengthening their emotional connection. Thus, the hypotheses formulated as follows.

H5: Social presence positively influences positive emotions.

H6: Social presence positively influences impulse buying intention.

H7: Social presence positively influences empathy.

3.5 Positive emotions

Emotions result in favorable consumer evaluations, greater product likability, and stronger impulse buying intentions. Hedonic products particularly benefit from emotional and playful anthropomorphism. Based on the theory of affective responses , positive emotions enhance the attractiveness of products, create a sense of urgency, and make consumers more likely to make impulse purchases [38]. In addition, in the SOR model, stimuli such as product packaging or store environment can elicit affective responses (positive emotions) from consumers, which in turn drive behavioral responses (impulse buying) [39] . Positive emotions play a mediating role between external stimuli and impulsive buying behavior [40]. Therefore, anthropomorphic packaging can evoke consumer reactions and lead to the purchase of products. Rook et al. (2022) found that positive emotions such as excitement and happiness significantly increase the likelihood of impulse buying [41]. Their research emphasizes that consumers who experience positive emotions are more likely to take action on spontaneous desires without deep consideration. Herabadi explored the role of emotional states in impulse buying and found that positive emotions significantly increased impulse buying tendencies. They believe that positive emotions can lower consumers’ self-control and make them more likely to make impulsive decisions. Zhang et al. studied the impact of positive emotions on impulse buying in online shopping contexts. Their research findings indicate that positive emotions, such as happiness and satisfaction, significantly enhance impulse buying intentions by increasing consumers’ perceived enjoyment and reducing their hesitation. Hence, the following hypothesis is constructed.

H8: Positive Emotions positively influences impulse buying intention.

3.6 Empathy

Empathy plays a pivotal role in consumer decision-making, particularly when objects express emotions that evoke emotional resonance. Visual anthropomorphic elements, which mimic human emotions, lead consumers to perceive the product as an emotional entity [42]. According to linguistic empathy theory, language that conveys emotions and personality traits can further enhance empathy. Emotional language helps consumers understand and relate to the emotions expressed by the product, eliciting empathetic responses [43]. High levels of empathy strengthen emotional bonds between consumers and products, fostering greater brand loyalty and purchase intentions. By eliciting empathy, anthropomorphic design enhances the product’s emotional appeal and distinctiveness, fostering affinity and trust, which in turn shape purchasing behavior. Positive anthropomorphic cues in beverage packaging evoke state empathy, enhancing consumers’ impulse buying intentions and amplifying positive emotions. Empathy not only influences impulse buying intentions but also plays a crucial role in evoking positive emotions such as happiness, satisfaction, and joy [44]. These positive emotions enhance the overall appeal of the product and drive consumer behavior. Empirical studies support these relationships. For instance, Su et al. (2023) found that empathy significantly mediates the relationship between anthropomorphic design and purchase intention [45]. Their research suggests that consumers with stronger empathy toward anthropomorphic products are more likely to make unplanned purchases. Similarly, Rachmad (2024) emphasized that empathy-driven emotional resonance enhances brand loyalty and impulse buying behavior, particularly in emotionally charged situations [46]. These findings highlight the dual role of empathy in both driving impulse buying intentions and evoking positive emotions, which collectively enhance the product’s appeal and influence consumer behavior. Thus, the hypotheses formulated as follows.

H9: Empathy positively influences impulse buying intention.

H10: Empathy positively influences positive emotions.

4 Experimental results

4.1 Questionnaire source

The questionnaire for this study aims to investigate the effects of anthropomorphic beverage packaging design on impulse buying intentions and its underlying mechanisms. The questionnaire is divided into third sections: design elements, consumer emotional responses, individual psychological traits, and purchase behavior. The first section covers Anthropomorphic Design, specifically focusing on visual and verbal cues. The second section addresses Positive Emotions, Social Presence, and Empathy. The third focuses on Impulse Buying Intention. The questionnaire is designed with a rational structure, ensuring comprehensive coverage of all variables relevant to the study. It maintains logical relationships and a clear hierarchical structure among variables. Questions in each section were adapted from classic scales in related fields and tailored to the context of anthropomorphic beverage packaging design. All measurement items were sourced from established scales in related fields and were tailored to the specific context of anthropomorphic beverage packaging design, as shown in Table 1. Data collection occurred between June 1, 2024, and September 30, 2024. The survey targeted beverage consumers in Shenzhen, Guangdong Province. A total of 308 valid responses were collected. All participants provided informed consent and adhered to the Ethics Committee’s requirements, ensuring data authenticity and research compliance.

Table 1. Sources of questionnaire measurement items.

Variables Source
Anthropomorphic design (Visual cues) Aggarwal & McGill (2007) [47]; Guido & Peluso (2015) [48]; Mourey et al. (2017) [49]; Kim & McGill (2018) [50]
Anthropomorphic design (Verbal cues) Bartneck et al. (2009) [51]; Chen & Ham (2024) [52]
Impulse Buying Intention Beatty & Ferrell (1998) [53]; Park et al. (2012) [54]
Positive Emotions Hsieh et al. (2021) [55]; Mummalaneni (2005) [56]; Mehrabian & Russell (1974) [57]
Social Presence Gefen & Straub (2003) [58]; Lim & Soutar (2021)[59]; Gao & Li (2017)[60]
Empathy Escalas & Stern (2003) [61]; Shen (2010) [62]

4.2 Analysis of basic information from the questionnaire

This study’s questionnaire is designed to investigate how anthropomorphic beverage packaging influences consumers’ impulsive buying intentions and the mechanisms underlying this effect. The questionnaire employed detailed variables and structured questions to gather comprehensive data on consumer demographics, purchasing behavior, and psychological states. Fig 2 shows that 42.9% of respondents are aged 24 to 30, representing the largest age group and the primary market segment. The second-largest group (19–23 years) comprises 26.9% of respondents, followed by the 31–35 age group at 18.5%. Respondents under 18 and those aged 36–45 form smaller groups, at 6.2% and 5.5%, respectively. These findings highlight young and middle-aged consumers as the primary targets in the beverage market. Regarding income, 45.6% of respondents earn 4,001–6,000 RMB monthly, forming the largest group. The next largest group (25.7%) earns 6,001–8,000 RMB monthly. Those earning less than 4,000 RMB and over 8,000 RMB represent 20.8% and 7.9% of respondents, respectively. These results suggest that middle-income consumers constitute the core market segment. Regarding monthly expenditure, 59.4% of respondents spend 501–1,000 RMB, representing the largest group. The second-largest group (18.8%) spends 1,001–1,500 RMB. Respondents spending 1,501–2,000 RMB and over 2,001 RMB account for 8.4% and 7.1%, respectively. Just 6.2% of respondents report a monthly expenditure below 500 RMB. These findings reveal that mid-to-low income groups drive the beverage market’s spending power. This pattern aligns with the classification of beverages as fast-moving consumer goods. Concerning packaging preferences, vintage and classic designs are the most favored, with 51.9% of respondents indicating a preference for these styles. Unique and innovative styles rank second, preferred by 39.0% of respondents. Minimalist and modern designs attract 12.9% of respondents. The least preferred styles are eco-friendly and natural (4.9%) and bright and colorful (3.2%). These findings suggest a preference for packaging that conveys cultural value and emotional appeal.

Fig 2. Basic information distribution statistics.

Fig 2

4.3 Exploratory factor analysis

4.3.1 Reliability and validity analysis.

This study employed exploratory factor analysis (EFA) to assess the construct validity and internal consistency of the questionnaire. Cronbach’s Alpha coefficient was first applied to examine the internal consistency of each construct in the questionnaire. Table 2 indicates that all variables have Alpha values exceeding 0.8, with an overall Cronbach’s Alpha of 0.936. These findings demonstrate high internal consistency across all constructs. Next, the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) measure and Bartlett’s sphericity test were employed to assess the sample’s suitability for factor analysis. The KMO statistic measures the adequacy of the sample for factor analysis. All variables exhibit KMO values exceeding 0.7, with an overall KMO of 0.935, significantly surpassing the minimum threshold of 0.6. These results confirm the data’s suitability for factor analysis. Furthermore, the results validate the questionnaire’s high reliability and validity in assessing the effects of anthropomorphic beverage packaging on consumers’ impulse buying intentions and related psychological mechanisms.

Table 2. Reliability and effectiveness.
Variables Items Alpha KMO
Anthropomorphic design (Visual cues) 4 .887 .841
Anthropomorphic design (Verbal cues) 4 .849 .813
Impulse Buying Intention 4 .863 .821
Positive Emotions 6 .892 .902
Social Presence 4 .880 .837
Empathy 4 .858 .820
Total 26 .936 .935

4.3.2 Factor number analysis.

This study performed a factor analysis on the questionnaire data to identify the optimal number of factors. Using Kaiser’s criterion (eigenvalue > 1) and cumulative explained variance, five primary factors were extracted, as presented in Table 3. The initial eigenvalues of the five factors were 10.111,2.858,2.084,1.463 and 1.009, all exceeding 1, satisfying Kaiser’s extraction criterion. Together, these factors explained 67.405% of the total variance, sufficiently capturing the main variability in the data. A detailed analysis of factor composition revealed: the first factor comprised Anthropomorphic Design (Verbal Cues), Impulse Buying Intention, and Positive Emotions. The second factor included only Anthropomorphic Design (Visual Cues). The third, fourth, and fifth factors corresponded to Social Presence, Empathy, and Loneliness, respectively. After rotation, squared loadings exceeded 0.7 for all variables within each factor. These high loadings confirmed the rationality of the factor structure and demonstrated convergent validity, ensuring independence and validity for each factor. Furthermore, low correlations between the five factors confirmed their independence. This finding supports the model’s simplicity and explanatory power.

Table 3. Results of factor number analysis.
Item Initial Eigenvalues Rotated Loadings Sum of Squares
Eigenvalue Variance (%) Cumulative (%) Sum of Squares Variance (%) Cumulative (%)
1 10.111 38.889 38.889 4.216 16.215 16.215
2 2.858 10.992 49.882 3.747 14.411 30.626
3 2.084 8.015 57.897 3.256 12.523 43.149
4 1.463 5.626 63.522 3.184 12.246 55.395
5 1.009 3.882 67.405 3.123 12.010 67.405

4.4 Factor analysis

Factor analysis results in Table 4 show that five main factors were extracted: anthropomorphic design, social presence, impulse buying intention, positive emotions, and empathy. In anthropomorphic design, the ADVEC series indicators had high loadings (approximately .715 to .755). This indicates that consumers are sensitive to emotional language. The ADVIC series indicators had lower loadings (approximately .428 to .541). This reflects that the role of visual cues is more dispersed. The loadings for the social presence factor ranged from .547 to .572. This indicates that consumers have consistent perceptions of the social interaction conveyed by the packaging. The impulse buying intention factor indicators all exceeded .800. This shows high internal consistency and provides empirical support for the direct influence of external stimuli on purchasing behavior. The indicators for both positive emotions and empathy had loadings above .763 and .725, respectively. This verifies the robustness of emotional responses and empathy experiences. The high loadings for each factor validate the convergent validity and internal consistency of the measurement model. They also suggest that consumers place greater importance on emotional language information. This provides a solid foundation for model refinement, theoretical expansion, and practical application.

Table 4. Factor components.

Construct Component 1 Component 2 Component 3 Component 4 Component 5
Anthropomorphic ADVEC2 .755
Design ADVEC3 .755
ADVEC4 .731
ADVEC1 .715
ADVIC2 .541
ADVIC4 .517
ADVIC3 .513
ADVIC1 .428
Social Presence SP4 .572
SP2 .563
SP3 .548
SP1 .547
Impulse Buying IBI4 .819
Intension IBI1 .809
IBI2 .808
IBI3 .800
Positive Emotions PE1 .786
PE5 .786
PE6 .782
PE2 .781
PE3 .767
PE4 .763
Empathy EM4 .827
EM3 .782
EM1 .771
EM2 .725

4.5 Confirmatory factor analysis

4.5.1 Model fit analysis.

To validate the questionnaire’s structural validity, confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted to assess model fit. Table 5 provides the CFA model fit indices. The chi-square value (CMIN) was 304.619, with degrees of freedom (DF) of 284. The CMIN/DF ratio was 1.073, below the threshold of 3, indicating a good model fit. Fit indices included NFI (0.938), RFI (0.929), IFI (0. 996), TLI (0.995), CFI (0.995), and GFI (0. 930), all exceeding the standard threshold of 0.9. These indices confirmed excellent model fit. Additionally, the RMSEA (Root Mean Square Error of Approximation) was 0.015, below 0.08, indicating low error and an ideal fit. All fit indices met or exceeded the recommended thresholds. These results demonstrate that the constructed measurement model possesses strong statistical fit and explanatory power.

Table 5. Model fit indices for confirmatory factor analysis.
Model Fit CMIN DF CMIN/DF NFI RFI IFI TLI CFI GFI RMSEA
Fit Results 304.619 284 1.073 .938 .929 .996 .995 .995 .930 .015
Judgment Std. - - <3 >0.9 >0.9 >0.9 >0.9 >0.9 >0.9 <0.08

4.5.2 Convergent validity and discriminant validity analysis.

This study performed convergent and discriminant validity analyses to verify the structural validity of the questionnaire measurement model. Table 6 shows that all constructs have factor loadings exceeding 0.7. This indicates strong correlations between measurement items and their corresponding latent variables, confirming convergent validity. Additionally, the composite reliability (CR) values for all constructs exceeded 0.7, meeting the recommended threshold. These results further support the questionnaire’s internal consistency and measurement reliability. All constructs demonstrated AVE (average variance extracted) values exceeding 0.5. This satisfies the standard for convergent validity, indicating that each construct effectively explains the variance of its measurement items. For discriminant validity, Table 7 shows the correlation coefficients between constructs. These coefficients were compared with the square roots of AVE values from Table 7. The AVE values for all constructs exceeded their correlations with other constructs. These findings confirm strong discriminant validity, ensuring the measurement model’s independence and accuracy.

Table 6. Convergent validity and composite reliability.
Construct Item Loading Factor CR AVE
Anthropomorphic design (Visual cues) ADVI4 0.836 0.888 0.664
ADVI3 0.796
ADVI2 0.840
ADVI1 0.787
Anthropomorphic design (Verbal cues) ADVE4 0.803 0.849 0.586
ADVE3 0.815
ADVE2 0.731
ADVE1 0.707
Positive Emotions PM11 0.774 0.892 0.579
PM12 0.754
PM13 0.759
PM14 0.757
PM15 0.755
PM16 0.770
Social Presence SP21 0.845 0.880 0.648
SP22 0.779
SP23 0.771
SP24 0.822
Empathy EM34 0.825 0.859 0.605
EM33 0.798
EM32 0.739
EM31 0.746
Impulse Buying Intention IBI1 0.750 0.864 0.614
IBI2 0.825
IBI3 0.770
IBI4 0.787
Table 7. Discriminant validity.
ADVI ADVE PM SP EM IBI
Anthropomorphic design (Visual cues) 0.815
Anthropomorphic design (Verbal cues) 0.467 0.765
Positive Emotions 0.298 0.401 0.761
Social Presence 0.693 0.677 0.419 0.805
Empathy 0.340 0.555 0.410 0.475 0.778
Impulse Buying Intention 0.610 0.743 0.564 0.769 0.640 0.783

4.6 Structural equation model path analysis

This study employed a structural equation model to analyze each path coefficient in detail. The model fit was good. The theoretical constructs and empirical data were highly consistent. The results (see Table 8) show that visual cues in packaging design significantly enhanced social presence (β = 0.506, SE = 0.061, C.R. = 8.308, p < 0.001). Verbal cues also significantly enhanced social presence (β = 0.510, SE = 0.063, C.R. = 8.119, p < 0.001). These findings indicate that consumers experienced clear social interaction when perceiving anthropomorphic features. Further analysis revealed that social presence significantly influenced empathy (β = 0.507, SE = 0.064, C.R. = 7.940, p < 0.001) and positive emotions (β = 0.276, SE = 0.064, C.R. = 4.287, p < 0.001). Empathy also exerted a positive effect on positive emotions (β = 0.230, SE = 0.065, C.R. = 3.555, p < 0.001). In terms of impulse buying intention, the direct effect of visual cues was weak (β = 0.130, SE = 0.056, C.R. = 2.299, p = 0.022), whereas verbal cues had a strong direct influence (β = 0.258, SE = 0.060, C.R. = 4.285, p < 0.001). In addition, positive emotions (β = 0.190, SE = 0.046, C.R. = 4.140, p < 0.001) and empathy (β = 0.189, SE = 0.044, C.R. = 4.284, p < 0.001) significantly promoted impulse buying intention. The direct effect of social presence on impulse buying intention was not significant (β = 0.005, SE = 0.087, C.R. = 2.264, p=0.101), which suggests that social presence mainly exerts its influence through the mediating roles of empathy and positive emotions. Overall, the visual and verbal cues in anthropomorphic packaging design enhance social presence, which in turn indirectly stimulates empathy and positive emotions, thereby driving impulse buying intention, with the direct effects of verbal cues and emotional factors being particularly significant.

Table 8. Path coefficients in the structural equation model.

Hyp. Path Estimate S.E. C.R. P Conclusion
H3 Social Presence Anthropomorphic design (Visual cues) 0.506 0.061 8.308 *** Supported
H4 Social Presence Anthropomorphic design (Verbal cues) 0.510 0.063 8.119 *** Supported
H7 Empathy Social Presence 0.507 0.064 7.940 *** Supported
H5 Positive Emotions Social Presence 0.276 0.064 4.287 *** Supported
H10 Positive Emotions Empathy 0.230 0.065 3.555 *** Supported
H1 Impulse Buying Intension Anthropomorphic design (Visual cues) 0.130 0.056 2.299 0.022 Supported
H2 Impulse Buying Intension Anthropomorphic design (Verbal cues) 0.258 0.060 4.285 *** Supported
H8 Impulse Buying Intension Positive Emotions 0.190 0.046 4.140 *** Supported
H6 Impulse Buying Intension Social Presence 0.005 0.087 2.264 0.101 Not Supported
H9 Impulse Buying Intension Empathy 0.189 0.044 4.284 *** Supported

This study further assessed potential common method bias using the ULMC approach (see Table 9). The results confirmed that CMV did not significantly influence our path coefficients, reinforcing the robustness of the hypothesized relationships.The model fitting index shows that compared with the original model, the ULMC model did not significantly improve the fitting degree (ΔCFI=0.002; ΔRMSEA=0.001) . The single factor model showed poor fit (CFI = 0.72, RMSEA = 0.14), confirming that CMV is unlikely to confuse our results. Therefore, the fitting index of the ULMC model did not significantly improve, and the poor fitting of the single factor model indicates that the variance of commonly used methods did not substantially affect our structural equation modeling results.

Table 9. ULMC analysis for common method variance.

Model χ2/df CFI RMSEA SRMR
Original Measurement Model 1.92 0.97 0.04 0.03
ULMC Model 1.89 0.97 0.04 0.03
Single-Factor Model 4.76 0.72 0.14 0.12

4.7 Discussion

The empirical results of this study generally align with theoretical expectations (see Fig 3). The findings reveal some subtle differences. Visual cues and verbal cues both effectively enhance consumers’ sense of social presence, which supports social presence theory. Products simulate interpersonal interaction to provide a context for emotional experiences and subsequent behavior. Although theory predicts that social presence will trigger empathy, the revised empirical results confirm a strong direct relationship between them, indicating that a heightened sense of social presence is indeed a critical antecedent to evoking empathy. In addition, positive emotions are influenced by both social presence and empathy. This is consistent with the stimulus-organism-response model and emotional response theory, and it further demonstrates that positive emotions mediate impulse buying intention. Notably, while empathy and positive emotions play significant roles in shaping impulse buying behavior, the direct effect of social presence on impulse buying intention is not statistically significant. In summary, the results indicate that anthropomorphic design significantly influences consumer impulse buying behavior through a series of interconnected psychological processes. These findings provide theoretical support and practical insights for packaging design and marketing strategies, while also suggesting promising directions for further exploration of mechanisms that activate consumer empathy.

Fig 3. Path coefficients for hypotheses.

Fig 3

By synthesizing the statistical results of all hypotheses, we find a close relationship between the p-values and the path coefficients. This reflects both the statistical significance of the relationships among variables and their practical impact within the theoretical model. Low p-values indicate highly significant relationships, while larger path coefficients suggest stronger effects in real contexts. This finding is consistent with Chitturi et al. (2021) on the impact of emotional and visual cues in packaging design on consumer behavior [63]. At the same time, some paths, though statistically significant, have smaller coefficients, suggesting that companies should focus on factors with larger effects or consider combining additional design strategies to amplify the weaker ones. This aligns with Kumar et al. (2023) regarding how language and visual cues in anthropomorphic design evoke emotional resonance [64]. Furthermore, the model validates the mediating roles of social presence and positive emotions in consumer decision-making. This provides theoretical support for companies to enhance social interaction and emotional experience in packaging design, and it demonstrates that reinforcing these factors can indirectly boost impulse buying intention, which is consistent with LI et al. (2023) [65]. In summary, these internal relationships not only provide strong support for the theoretical model but also offer important insights for practical marketing strategies. Companies should prioritize factors that are both statistically significant and have substantial effects by reinforcing emotional language and building a strong sense of social presence to ultimately maximize positive emotions and impulse buying intention.

The findings of this study not only validate the effectiveness of the theoretical model but also offer feasible insights for innovations in packaging design and marketing strategies. The results indicate that, although most hypotheses were supported, the direct effect of social presence on impulse buying intention was not significant. This suggests that relying solely on creating a social atmosphere is insufficient to directly evoke consumers’ impulse buying. Instead, social presence primarily operates by enhancing empathy and positive emotions. Therefore, companies should employ multiple methods during the design process. For example, they should incorporate emotional expression and storytelling into both visual and verbal design and leverage digital interactive technologies such as augmented reality and virtual experiences to create immersive consumption scenarios. This approach can effectively enhance social presence while more robustly triggering empathy and positive emotions. Cheng et al. (2022) pointed out that high-quality emotional and visual elements can significantly enhance consumers’ emotional identification with a product [66]. Prisca et al. (2023) emphasized that anthropomorphic design makes a product more appealing and narrows the emotional distance between consumers and the brand [67]. Zhang et al. (2023) confirmed that immersive experiences created by emerging interactive technologies help strengthen social interaction and emotional resonance, thereby increasing purchase intention [68]. These empirical results provide companies with a clear strategic direction. In a competitive market, companies should prioritize design factors that are both statistically significant and have large effects, enhancing brand attractiveness and competitiveness through innovative, multi-dimensional, and multi-sensory strategies. Simultaneously, they should pay attention to the synergistic effects among various factors by integrating emotional language, rich visual presentation, and interactive experiences to build a comprehensive and emotionally engaging marketing ecosystem that meets diverse consumer needs. It is important to note that this study has limitations regarding the sample region and consumer group as well as in the measurement and interpretation of the empathy mechanism. Future research can introduce additional contextual variables and longitudinal data to further explore the dynamic relationships among the factors in anthropomorphic design, thereby providing more solid support for theoretical expansion and practical application.

5 Implications

5.1 Theoretical implications

This study employs empirical analysis to explore how visual and verbal cues in anthropomorphic beverage packaging design influence consumers’ impulse buying intentions. It contributes to the theoretical understanding of anthropomorphic design and consumer behavior by validating the applicability of the Stimulus-Organism-Response (S-O-R) model. The findings demonstrate that external stimuli (anthropomorphic design) influence behavioral responses (impulse buying intention) by shaping internal psychological states, including positive emotions, social presence, and empathy. This mechanism is empirically supported [69]. The study underscores the distinct roles of visual and verbal cues in anthropomorphic design. Visual cues primarily enhance positive emotions and social presence, while verbal cues evoke stronger empathetic responses. These findings provide deeper insights into the mechanisms underlying different types of cues in anthropomorphic design. They also align with Lim et al. (2021)’s [70] cognitive appraisal theory, which posits that verbal information induces deeper cognitive processing and attitude changes. Furthermore, the study reveals that visual anthropomorphic design does not significantly affect empathy, suggesting that verbal cues are more effective in eliciting deep emotional resonance. This offers new perspectives for anthropomorphic design theory. By integrating theories of anthropomorphic design, positive emotions, social presence, and empathy, this study develops a systematic theoretical model. It explains the psychological mechanisms through which anthropomorphic design in beverage packaging influences impulse buying intentions, thereby advancing research in related fields.

5.2 Practical implications

This study provides valuable insights for businesses in beverage packaging design and marketing strategies. First, verbal anthropomorphic design plays a more significant role than visual design in stimulating consumers’ impulse buying intentions. It evokes positive emotions, enhances social presence, and triggers empathy. This finding aligns with Huang et al. (2023) [71] cognitive appraisal theory, which suggests that detailed verbal information induces deeper cognitive processing and attitude changes. Therefore, businesses should incorporate emotional language, humor, and personalized expressions into packaging to convey product emotions and personality, thereby influencing consumer decisions. Since visual design does not significantly impact empathy, combining visual and verbal elements can create multidimensional and vivid product images. For example, pairing anthropomorphic cartoon characters with emotional statements on packaging can address the limitations of visual cues and enhance marketing effectiveness [72]. Additionally, businesses should leverage social media’s interactivity and reach to amplify the impact of anthropomorphic design. By integrating online and offline strategies, companies can share anthropomorphic product images and stories to enhance consumer engagement and build a sense of community. Finally, companies should continuously monitor consumer behavior and market trends to dynamically adjust their strategies. They should innovate anthropomorphic designs to cater to diverse cultural needs, ensuring effectiveness and competitiveness in the global market.

6 Conclusion

This study investigated how anthropomorphic design in beverage packaging affects consumers’ impulse buying intention. The research results indicate that both visual and verbal cues can significantly enhance impulse buying intention. This study validated the stimulus biological response model and emotion theory in the context of anthropomorphic design, enriching the relevant theoretical framework. The research results indicate that social presence has no significant impact on impulse buying. In the context of beverage packaging, consumers may be more concerned with product functionality (such as taste, thirst quenching) or visual appeal rather than social interaction or emotional connection. Social presence is usually more important in products that are highly social or interactive, such as social media platforms or virtual assistants, while its impact may be weaker in low engagement products like beverages. In summary, this study encourages companies to use emotional language, humor, and personalized expression in their packaging. Combining visual and linguistic personification elements can create more attractive product images. The use of social media can expand the influence of anthropomorphic design and increase consumer engagement. However, this study is limited by its regional sample size. Future research should expand the sample size and geographical scope. This study only focuses on visual and verbal cues; Future research can explore multi sensory anthropomorphic design. In addition, cross-sectional design limits the ability to analyze long-term effects. Future research should adopt a longitudinal approach to examine long-term effects and provide deeper insights.

Questionnaire

The questionnaire is shown in Table 10.

Table 10. Questionnaire information.

Anthropomorphic Design (Visual Cues) 1 – The product (packaging) looks like a person.
2 – The product (packaging) has a human-like expression.
3 – The product (packaging) has a human-like appearance.
4 – The product (packaging) has come alive.
Anthropomorphic Design (Verbal Cues) 1 – The verbal style of this product (packaging) is natural.
2 – The verbal style of this product (packaging) is humanlike.
3 – The verbal style of this product (packaging) is conscious.
4 – The verbal style of this product (packaging) is elegant.
Impulse Buying Intention 1 – When I saw the product (packaging), I had a strong desire to buy it.
2 – When I saw the product (packaging), I wanted to have it immediately.
3 – When I saw the product (packaging), I felt that the product was what I wanted.
4 – When I saw the product (packaging), I wanted to buy it even though it was not what I had planned to buy before.
Positive Emotions (Pleasure & Arousal) 1 – When I saw the product (packaging), I felt happy.
2 – When I saw the product (packaging), I felt pleasure.
3 – When I saw the product (packaging), I felt hopeful.
4 – When I saw the product (packaging), I felt satisfied.
5 – When I saw the product (packaging), I felt active.
6 – When I saw the product (packaging), I felt excited.
Social Presence 1 – There is a sense of human contact with this product (packaging).
2 – This product (packaging) has a personalized touch.
3 – There is a human-like warmth associated with this product (packaging).
4 – There is a sense of human sensitivity associated with this product (packaging).
Empathy 1 – While watching the product (packaging), I can feel the packaging’s emotions.
2 – While watching the product (packaging), I experienced many of the same feelings that the packaging portrayed.
3 – While watching the product (packaging), I can understand what the packaging is going through.
4 – While watching the product (packaging), I felt like I was the packaging.

7 Supporting information

S1 Appendix. Further details regarding the anthropomorphic design of this study.

(PDF)

pone.0326186.s001.pdf (1.6MB, pdf)

Data Availability

The dataset of this study has been uploaded to the public database Mendeley Data at DOI: 10.17632/tdvycymws7.1 (https://data.mendeley.com/datasets/tdvycymws7/1).

Funding Statement

The author(s) received no specific funding for this work.

References

  • 1.Zhang Y-T, Liu T, Chen J, Chen Y-W. The influence of product anthropomorphism on impulse buying. In: Proceedings of the 2020 11th International Conference on E-business, Management and Economics. 2020. p. 48–52.
  • 2.Nguyen NPP, Bui TT, Ha AQ. The role of brand anthropomorphism in building brand attachment: the experiment research on beverage brands. HCMCOUJS – Econ Bus Administ. 2024;14(4):20–40. doi: 10.46223/hcmcoujs.econ.en.14.4.3406.2024 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Saputra MH, Ardyan E, Tanesia CY, Ariningsih EP. Building brand resonance: optimizing symbolic brand reputation and customers’ emotional value. ASEAN Market J. 2021;13(2):5. doi: 10.21002/amj.v13i2.13524 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Stocchi L, Pourazad N, Michaelidou N, Tanusondjaja A, Harrigan P. Marketing research on mobile apps: past, present and future. J Acad Market Sci. 2022:1–31. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • 5.Siraj A, Zaman SI. Elevating consumer’s affection headed for brand. JBEM. 2022;2(1):73–118. doi: 10.56596/jbem.v2i1.74 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Ishigaki R, Shreeves M, Madhabika LN. The impacts of anthropomorphic plastic bottle designs on consumers’ recycling intention: the mediating effects of anticipatory guilt, empathy, and identity-connection. In: Asia-Pacific Conference on Economics & Finance, 2023. p. 65–83.
  • 7.Wang J, Peng L. Striking an emotional chord: Effects of emotional appeals and chatbot anthropomorphism on persuasive science communication. Sci Commun. 2023;45(4):485–511. [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Cachero-Martínez S, García-Rodríguez N, Salido-Andrés N. Because I’m happy: exploring the happiness of shopping in social enterprises and its effect on customer satisfaction and loyalty. Manag Decis. 2024;62(2):492–512. [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Salam KN, Singkeruang AWTF, Husni MF, Baharuddin B, AR DP. Gen-Z marketing strategies: Understanding consumer preferences and building sustainable relationships. Golden Ratio Mapp Idea Literat Format. 2024;4(1):53–77. [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Erensoy A, Mathrani A, Schnack A, Elms J, Baghaei N. Consumer behavior in immersive virtual reality retail environments: a systematic literature review using the stimuli–organisms–responses (S-O-R) model. J Consum Behav. 2024;23(6):2781–811. [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Sari K, Pratama AI. The effect of packaging design on impulsive buying behavior (case study on mentos products). InovbizMIK. 2021;1(1):5. doi: 10.35314/inovbizmik.v1i1.1874 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Safeer AA. Harnessing the power of brand social media marketing on consumer online impulse buying intentions: a stimulus–organism–response framework. J Prod Brand Manag. 2024.
  • 13.Fumagalli E, Shrum LJ, Lowrey TM. Consuming in response to loneliness: bright side and dark side effects. Curr Opin Psychol. 2022;46:101329. doi: 10.1016/j.copsyc.2022.101329 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Jin X, Qian M. A review of brand anthropomorphism marketing research. BCP Bus Manag. 2021;14:1–8. [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Liew TW, Tan SM. Social cues and implications for designing expert and competent artificial agents: a systematic review. Telematics Inform. 2021;65:101721. [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Ahn J, Kwon J. The role of trait and emotion in cruise customers’ impulsive buying behavior: an empirical study. J Strateg Market. 2022;30(3):320–33. [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Smith C, Kabamba CC. The role of consumers’ emotions in online impulse buying of fashion apparel. Int J Bus Soc Sci Res. 2022:1–8. 10.47742/ijbssr.v3n9p1 [DOI]
  • 18.Zafar AU, Qiu J, Shahzad M, Shen J, Bhutto TA, Irfan M. Impulse buying in social commerce: bundle offer, top reviews, and emotional intelligence. APJML. 2020;33(4):945–73. doi: 10.1108/apjml-08-2019-0495 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Fang X, Zhang F, Liao K, Ghoreishi M. Emotional regulation factors of impulse buying and conformity psychology. Int J Neuropsychopharmacol. 2022:A43–4.
  • 20.Tian Y, Zakaria SF, Wang J, Qiu Y. A review of the effects of anthropomorphic design on consumer emotions. MJSSH. 2025;10(2):e003231. [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Yuyang T, Zakaria SF. A review of the effects of anthropomorphic design on consumer emotions. In: Copyright Page e-Proceedings of International Symposium on Community Social Responsibility 2024 (i-CSR2024). 2024. p. 589.
  • 22.Chen T, Razzaq A, Qing P, Cao B. Do you bear to reject them? The effect of anthropomorphism on empathy and consumer preference for unattractive produce. J Retail Consum Serv. 2021;61:102556. doi: 10.1016/j.jretconser.2021.102556 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Chi NTK, Hoang Vu N. Investigating the customer trust in artificial intelligence: the role of anthropomorphism, empathy response, and interaction. CAAI Trans Intel Tech. 2022;8(1):260–73. doi: 10.1049/cit2.12133 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Al Farisi R, Ferdiana R, Adji TB. The effect of anthropomorphic design cues on increasing chatbot empathy. In: 2022 1st International Conference on Information System & Information Technology (ICISIT). 2022. p. 370–5.
  • 25.Tang J, Wang Y, Zhou X, Guo J, Li C. Can chatbot anthropomorphism and empathy mitigate the impact of customer anger on satisfaction?. In: International Conference on Information. Cham: Springer; 2024. p. 84–95. [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Kumar DS, Purani K, Viswanathan SA. The indirect experience of nature: biomorphic design forms in servicescapes. JSM. 2020;34(6):847–67. doi: 10.1108/jsm-10-2019-0418 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Chen-Yu JH, Kincade DH, Rhee Y. Effects of consumer characteristics and product presentations on online apparel impulse buying. J Glob Fashion Market. 2022;13(3):205–20. doi: 10.1080/20932685.2022.2032793 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Anita TL, Zulkarnain A, Wiyana T, Leonandri DG, Immanuel H. The antecedents of online impulsive buying. In: Proceedings of the 2023 8th International Conference on Business and Industrial Research (ICBIR). 2023. p. 322–6.
  • 29.Chere’C Y, Lazatin WD. Consumers’ impulse buying behaviors vis-à-vis visual merchandising in selected malls in Pampanga. Int J Multidiscip: Appl Bus Educ Res. 2022;3(4):556–70. [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Zhang Y, Wang S. The influence of anthropomorphic appearance of artificial intelligence products on consumer behavior and brand evaluation under different product types. J Retail Consum Serv. 2023;74:103432. [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Huang Z, Zhu Y, Hao A, Deng J. How social presence influences consumer purchase intention in live video commerce: the mediating role of immersive experience and the moderating role of positive emotions. J Res Interact Market. 2023;17(4):493–509. [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Anisah TN, Najmudin M, Sardi AE. From interaction to transaction: Analyzing the influence of social presence on impulsive purchasing in live streaming commerce. Jurnal Manajemen Teori dan Terapan. 2023;16(3). [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Tsai WHS, Liu Y, Chuan CH. How chatbots’ social presence communication enhances consumer engagement: the mediating role of parasocial interaction and dialogue. J Res Interact Market. 2021;15(3):460–82. [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Kimiagari S, Malafe NSA. The role of cognitive and affective responses in the relationship between internal and external stimuli on online impulse buying behavior. J Retail Consum Serv. 2021;61:102567. [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Okur P, Baharum A, Ismail R, Nazlan NH, Ab Fatah NS, Noor NAM. Consumer purchasing behaviour of emotional design in e-commerce. Int J. 2020.
  • 36.Kim J, Lee M, Kwon W, Park H, Back KJ. Why am I satisfied? See my reviews–price and location matter in the restaurant industry. Int J Hosp Manag. 2022;101:103111. [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Pluta A, Mazurek J, Wojciechowski J, Wolak T, Soral W, Bilewicz M. Exposure to hate speech deteriorates neurocognitive mechanisms of the ability to understand others’ pain. Sci Rep. 2023;13(1):4127. doi: 10.1038/s41598-023-31146-1 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Liu-Thompkins Y, Okazaki S, Li H. Artificial empathy in marketing interactions: bridging the human-AI gap in affective and social customer experience. J Acad Market Sci. 2022;50(6):1198–218. [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Cai J, Yu L. Dual path mechanism of promoting classical furniture and customer responses: from the perspective of empathy. Front Psychol. 2022;13:999631. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.999631 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Wang C, Zheng Q, Zeng H, Lai R, Xu A. Can anthropomorphic slogans awaken tourists’ environmental responsibility behavior? Experimental study based on frame effect perspective. Sage Open. 2023;13(1). doi: 10.1177/21582440221144969 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Tsumura T, Yamada S. Influence of anthropomorphic agent on human empathy through games. IEEE Access. 2023;11:40412–29. [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Ferguson AM, Cameron CD, Inzlicht M. Motivational effects on empathic choices. J Exp Soc Psychol. 2020;90:104010. doi: 10.1016/j.jesp.2020.104010 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Cai J, Yu L. Dual path mechanism of promoting classical furniture and customer responses: From the perspective of empathy. Front Psychol. 2022;13:999631. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.999631 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Fullerton CS. Empathy is the message. Psychiatry. 2021;84(3):228–31. doi: 10.1080/00332747.2021.1958576 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Su A, Liang S, Zeng Y, Dong Z. Cuteness anthropomorphic purchase intention for unattractive products: the mediating role of empathy. AEMR. 2023;7(1):167. doi: 10.56028/aemr.7.1.167.2023 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Rachmad YE. Transforming digital consumers: the power of viral diffusion in consumer behavior. PT. Sonpedia Publishing Indonesia. 2024. [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Aggarwal P, McGill AL. Is that car smiling at me? schema congruity as a basis for evaluating anthropomorphized products. J Consum Res. 2007;34(4):468–79. doi: 10.1086/518544 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Guido G, Peluso AM. Brand anthropomorphism: conceptualization, measurement, and impact on brand personality and loyalty. J Brand Manag. 2015;22(1):1–19. doi: 10.1057/bm.2014.40 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Mourey JA, Olson JG, Yoon C. Products as pals: engaging with anthropomorphic products mitigates the effects of social exclusion. J Consum Res. 2017;44(2):414–31. [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Kim H-Y, McGill AL. Minions for the rich? Financial status changes how consumers see products with anthropomorphic features. J Consum Res. 2018;45(2):429–50. [Google Scholar]
  • 51.Bartneck C, Kulić D, Croft E, Zoghbi S. Measurement instruments for the anthropomorphism, animacy, likeability, perceived intelligence, and perceived safety of robots. Int J of Soc Robotics. 2008;1(1):71–81. doi: 10.1007/s12369-008-0001-3 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 52.Chen J, Li M, Ham J. Different dimensions of anthropomorphic design cues: how visual appearance and conversational style influence users’ information disclosure tendency towards chatbots. Int J Hum-Comput Stud. 2024;190:103320. doi: 10.1016/j.ijhcs.2024.103320 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 53.Beatty SE, Elizabeth Ferrell M. Impulse buying: modeling its precursors. J Retail. 1998;74(2):169–91. doi: 10.1016/s0022-4359(99)80092-x [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 54.Park EJ, Kim EY, Funches VM, Foxx W. Apparel product attributes, web browsing, and e-impulse buying on shopping websites. J Bus Res. 2012;65(11):1583–9. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2011.02.043 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 55.Hsieh SH, Lee CT, Tseng TH. Branded app atmospherics: examining the effect of pleasure–arousal–dominance in brand relationship building. J Retail Consum Serv. 2021;60:102482. doi: 10.1016/j.jretconser.2021.102482 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 56.Mummalaneni V. An empirical investigation of web site characteristics, consumer emotional states and on-line shopping behaviors. J Bus Res. 2005;58(4):526–32. [Google Scholar]
  • 57.Mehrabian A. An approach to environmental psychology. Massachusetts Institute of Technology. 1974. [Google Scholar]
  • 58.Gefen D, Straub D. Managing user trust in B2C e-services. e-Service J. 2003;2(2):7. doi: 10.2979/esj.2003.2.2.7 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 59.Lim X-J, Cheah J-H, Ng SI, Basha NK, Soutar G. The effects of anthropomorphism presence and the marketing mix on retail app continuance use intention. Technol Forecast Soc Change. 2021;168:120763. [Google Scholar]
  • 60.Gao W, Liu Z, Li J. How does social presence influence SNS addiction? A belongingness theory perspective. Comput Hum Behav. 2017;77:347–55. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2017.09.002 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 61.Escalas JE, Stern BB. Sympathy and empathy: emotional responses to advertising dramas. J Consum Res. 2003;29(4):566–78. doi: 10.1086/346251 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 62.Shen L. On a scale of state empathy during message processing. Western J Commun. 2010;74(5):504–24. [Google Scholar]
  • 63.Chitturi R, Londoño JC, Henriquez MC. Visual design elements of product packaging: implications for consumers’ emotions, perceptions of quality, and price. Color Res Appl. 2021;47(3):729–44. doi: 10.1002/col.22761 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 64.Kumar R, Singh T, Mohanty SN, Goel R, Gupta D, Alharbi M, et al. Study on online payments and e-commerce with SOR model. Int J Retail Distrib Manag. 2023.
  • 65.LI T, KONG X, WANG F. The influence of loneliness on consumption behavior and its theoretical explanations. Adv Psychol Sci. 2023;31(6):1078. doi: 10.3724/sp.j.1042.2023.01078 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 66.Cheng L. The effects of smartphone assistants’ anthropomorphism on consumers’ psychological ownership and perceived competence of smartphone assistants. J Consum Behav. 2022;21(2):427–42. doi: 10.1002/cb.2021 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 67.De Roni P, et al. Exploring the role of facial emotional expressions in charitable giving. Università degli studi di Padova. 2023. [Google Scholar]
  • 68.Zhang X, Cheng X, Huang X. “Oh, My God, Buy It!” Investigating impulse buying behavior in live streaming commerce. Int J Hum–Comput Interact. 2022;39(12):2436–49. doi: 10.1080/10447318.2022.2076773 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 69.Lee Y, Lay J, Mahmood A, Graf P, Hoppmann C. Loneliness and social engagement: the unique roles of state and trait loneliness for daily prosocial behaviors. Innov Aging. 2020;4(Supplement_1):627. doi: 10.1093/geroni/igaa057.2140 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 70.Lim MH, Allen K-A, Furlong MJ, Craig H, Smith DC. Introducing a dual continuum model of belonging and loneliness. Austral J Psychol. 2021;73(1):81–6. doi: 10.1080/00049530.2021.1883411 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 71.Huang Z, Zhu Y, Hao A, Deng J. How social presence influences consumer purchase intention in live video commerce: the mediating role of immersive experience and the moderating role of positive emotions. JRIM. 2022;17(4):493–509. doi: 10.1108/jrim-01-2022-0009 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 72.Chen C-Y, Huarng K-H, González VI. How creative cute characters affect purchase intention. J Bus Res. 2022;142:211–20. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.12.059 [DOI] [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

Simon Dang

11 Feb 2025

PONE-D-24-59115Can Anthropomorphic Design in Beverage Packaging Enhance Impulse Buying Intention? Amazing Visual and Verbal Cues!PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Tian,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Editor's comments:

==============================

Since our expert reviewers recognize the merits of your work, I am willing to provide an opportunity for revision. Please carefully consider the reviewers' comments and address each concern systematically and in detail.

==============================

Please submit your revised manuscript by Mar 28 2025 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Simon Dang

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. Please include a complete copy of PLOS’ questionnaire on inclusivity in global research in your revised manuscript. Our policy for research in this area aims to improve transparency in the reporting of research performed outside of researchers’ own country or community. The policy applies to researchers who have travelled to a different country to conduct research, research with Indigenous populations or their lands, and research on cultural artefacts. The questionnaire can also be requested at the journal’s discretion for any other submissions, even if these conditions are not met.  Please find more information on the policy and a link to download a blank copy of the questionnaire here: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/best-practices-in-research-reporting. Please upload a completed version of your questionnaire as Supporting Information when you resubmit your manuscript.

3. Please provide additional details regarding participant consent. In the ethics statement in the Methods and online submission information, please ensure that you have specified (1) whether consent was informed and (2) what type you obtained (for instance, written or verbal, and if verbal, how it was documented and witnessed). If your study included minors, state whether you obtained consent from parents or guardians. If the need for consent was waived by the ethics committee, please include this information.

If you are reporting a retrospective study of medical records or archived samples, please ensure that you have discussed whether all data were fully anonymized before you accessed them and/or whether the IRB or ethics committee waived the requirement for informed consent. If patients provided informed written consent to have data from their medical records used in research, please include this information.

4. Please provide the Questionnaires used in this study.

5. We note that Appendix includes an image of a participant in the study.

As per the PLOS ONE policy (http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-human-subjects-research) on papers that include identifying, or potentially identifying, information, the individual(s) or parent(s)/guardian(s) must be informed of the terms of the PLOS open-access (CC-BY) license and provide specific permission for publication of these details under the terms of this license. Please download the Consent Form for Publication in a PLOS Journal (http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=8ce6/plos-consent-form-english.pdf). The signed consent form should not be submitted with the manuscript, but should be securely filed in the individual's case notes. Please amend the methods section and ethics statement of the manuscript to explicitly state that the participant has provided consent for publication: “The individual in this manuscript has given written informed consent (as outlined in PLOS consent form) to publish these case details”.

If you are unable to obtain consent from the subject of the photograph, you will need to remove the figure and any other textual identifying information or case descriptions for this individual.

6. Please include captions for your Supporting Information files at the end of your manuscript, and update any in-text citations to match accordingly. Please see our Supporting Information guidelines for more information: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/supporting-information.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Partly

Reviewer #2: Partly

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: 1. This research contains too many simple and isolated sentences, which might cause boredom and confusions to the readers. Below are just examples. The author should proofread the whole manuscript:

“…This involves assigning human traits to non-human objects. Such design creates human-like appearances or behaviors. It aims to evoke emotional resonance in consumers. This strategy is widely used in marketing. It boosts product appeal and fosters consumer engagement….”

“Trust is another key mechanism. It reduces perceived risk. Trust enhances product credibility and reliability. This increases consumer trust and purchase likelihood. Empathy is defined as the ability to understand and share others’ emotions”

2. It is unclear about the context of this study. Is the impulse buying intention in a physical setting/m-commerce/website/banner ads, etc.? This needs to be explained in more detailed.

3. Line 61: anthropomorphic packaging was mentioned, however, it was not explicitly explained what is meant by anthropomorphic packaging. In addition, there are many weak supporting evidence. For example, it was stated that “sales surged by 4,600%”, is it merely due to anthropomorphic packaging? Are there any other factors, e.g. high brand awareness due to investment in ads, or promotion?. If the “surge” is in conjunction with many other factors, then these evidence are not strong enough to conclude that “These data suggest that anthropomorphic design in packaging significantly enhances consumers’ emotional identification and purchase intentions”

4. Line 74: There are many weak arguments, for example “whether anthropomorphic language styles influence consumer behavior through psychological mechanisms such as social presence, positive emotions, and empathy remains insufficiently explored.” Actually, there have been many research on anthropomorphic language styles and social presence. There are just a few references in the introduction.

5. Line 122: The author stated that “Anthropomorphic beverage packaging, which assigns human traits to products…”. However, the first hyperlink (DIGITALING) in line 61 shows photos of fruits (e.g. banana and strawberry) and animals (e.g. cat). The definition is not actually consistent to examples given. This will cause confusions to readers.

6. Line 164: The author has immediately switched from Concept of Impulse Buying Intention to SOR. It is important to create a reading flow for readers. In addition, the author needs to justify how SOR framework is applicable in the context of Impulse Buying Intention. Furthermore, SOR model should be explained in greater details.

7. In regards with questionnaires used in this research, all questions for Social presence are about human-likeness, which is the same as anthropomorphism. Therefore, it is very difficult to come up with a sound analysis. In addition, in table 1, sources of questionnaire measurement items were provided, however, it is unclear which one the author has adapted because the author has provided at least 2 sources for 1 construct. Take a look at reference 64, 5 items for social presence are much different from the items used in this research. This might be due to poor application of back-translating technique, leading to inaccurate analyses and findings.

8. Line 454: it is unclear if the author conducted an experimental research, or a Covariance-Based Structural Equation Modeling.

9. Marker variable test for common method bias check was missing.

10. Headings were not appropriately deployed, for example, Line 847

11. Control variables in the research model and analysis were missing.

Reviewer #2: Thank you for lending me this opportunity to read this paper. It is insightful and generally well-argued. However, I have several major considerations and suggestions:

1. In my opinion, one of the most fundamental weaknesses in this manuscript is the lack of coherence in the theoretical model. While the authors discussed each path between variables and cite theories to justify individual relationships, the model feels fragmented rather than conceptually unified. It appears as though the mediators (social presence, positive emotions, and empathy) were selected based on convenience rather than a systematic theoretical rationale. This raises a critical concern: Why were these three specific mediators chosen over other potential psychological mechanisms? Currently, the model lacks theoretical integrity such that it feels piecemeal rather than cohesive. The authors cited theoretical justifications for individual pathways, but they did not justify why these mediators should be examined together within the same framework. This suggests that the authors may not have considered how these mediators interact or why they are the most important psychological mechanisms in this context.

As currently presented, positive emotions, social presence, and empathy are conceptually distinct and do not seem to align under a single unifying theme. Therefore, I would suggest the authors to find a way to clearly demonstrate why these variables collectively form the most appropriate psychological mechanisms through which anthropomorphic design influences impulse buying intention. In other words, the authors are suggested to integrate these variables into a coherent framework and explain it clearly in the literature review. For example, the authors may think of categorizing mediators into one or more broader constructs that can align with each other under a single theme. Alternatively, if the authors want to maintain them as distinct variables, they should explain how these three mediators complement each other rather than operating in isolation.

2. In the current version of this paper, moreover, loneliness was treated as a moderator without adequate theoretical grounding. The choice of loneliness as a moderator lacks a compelling justification beyond speculative reasoning. The paper assumes that lonely consumers will respond more strongly to anthropomorphic packaging, but it does not explain why loneliness is the most relevant moderator over other psychological states. Ideally, a good and appropriate moderator should not deviate dramatically from the focal point of the main model/research context. Conceptually, it should be closely linked with IVs and (or) outcome variables. However, I cannot see why loneliness fits in this paper. Moreover, the proposed moderating effect of loneliness (i.e. the effects of anthropomorphic design will be stronger for high-loneliness consumers) is too obvious. Please do not get me wrong here – While intuitive insights can be valuable, readers may question whether this research is actually uncovering new consumer insights or simply confirming common sense. If a moderator’s effect is overly self-evident, it diminishes the contribution of the study because it does not challenge or refine existing theoretical perspectives.

Therefore, if the authors wish to retain loneliness as the moderator, I suggest (1) Explaining clearly why loneliness is the most relevant psychological state/moderator that need to be considered in this research; (2) refining the argument to introduce theoretical complexity in hypotheses development; and (3) Considering testing an additional moderator to strengthen the study’s robustness.

3. The study surveyed 308 beverage consumers in Shenzhen, yet the authors do not provide any justification for why Shenzhen is an appropriate market for this study. This is a critical omission because market characteristics (e.g., consumer demographics, cultural tendencies, purchasing behaviours) can significantly influence the results. Without this justification, it is unclear whether the findings can be generalized to other markets or if Shenzhen represents a unique consumer group.

Additionally, the manuscript did not specify how the sample was recruited. Was it through random sampling, convenience sampling, or quota sampling? The lack of transparency in sampling methodology raises concerns about potential selection bias, which could impact the study’s validity.

The authors also need to justify why a sample size of 308 is appropriate for this study. Given that the proposed model consists of seven constructs, a larger sample would typically be expected to ensure adequate statistical power and model stability in SEM. It would be useful for the authors to conduct and report a power analysis to determine whether 308 responses provide sufficient power to detect meaningful effects.

Lastly, the manuscript misuses the term "experimental results" when describing its findings. Since the study is purely survey-based without an experimental design (i.e. there are no control vs. treatment groups), the term “experimental” is misleading and should be replaced with more appropriate terminology such as “survey findings” or “empirical results” to avoid confusion.

4. While the methodological section is generally solid, the authors failed to test for common method variance, which is a significant concern in survey-based research. To address this, the authors need to include a formal test for CMV, using Marker variable / ULMC / other methods. Please note that Harman’s single-factor test is insufficient and should not be used.

5. The authors did not mention whether control variables were included in the analysis, yet several key consumer characteristics are likely to influence impulse buying behaviours. Specifically, brand familiarity, product experiences, and prior purchasing behaviours are known to have strong effects on consumer decision-making. Without controlling for these factors, the authors risked overestimating the effect of anthropomorphic design because the observed relationships could be partially explained by consumers' pre-existing attitudes / experiences. If control variables were included, the authors need to explicitly state which ones were used, how they were measured, and how they influenced the results. If no control variables were included, the authors must provide a strong justification for why they were omitted and acknowledge this as a limitation.

6. I found that many sections (especially in Theoretical development, Hypotheses, and Results discussion) repeated the same points multiple times. Please streamline the manuscript to remove redundancy. It also seems that the authors put too much emphasis on discussing concepts and theories (e.g., trust, Self-congruity theory, etc.) that irrelevant to the focal points of this research. If I were wrong about this, then please clearly explain how they related to this research. Otherwise, please reduce these discussions which may distract readers. In my opinion, the implications are generic and lack depth. The study concludes that anthropomorphic design can enhance impulse buying, but it fails to translate these findings into concrete marketing strategies that beverage companies can use. Please find a way to strengthen the practical implications, focusing on how beverage companies should specifically implement anthropomorphic design strategies.

I hope you find my suggestions useful. Good luck with your research!

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

**********

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

PLoS One. 2025 Jun 16;20(6):e0326186. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0326186.r003

Author response to Decision Letter 1


9 Apr 2025

Dear Reviewers,

Thank you very much for your thorough and constructive feedback on our manuscript titled "Can Anthropomorphic Design in Beverage Packaging Enhance Impulse Buying Intention? Amazing Visual and Verbal Cues!". This study systematically examines how anthropomorphic visual and verbal cues in beverage packaging influence consumers' impulse buying intentions. Grounded in the Stimulus-Organism-Response model, Social Presence Theory, and Empathy Theory, the research employs a consumer survey to validate the mediating roles of positive emotions, social presence, and empathy in the relationship between anthropomorphic design and impulse buying intentions. A comprehensive causal model was developed to explore these relationships. Based on the comments provided by the reviewers, significant modifications have been made to this study, including the establishment of a new model and the relationships between various variables. In addition, more relevant literature was consulted to support this study.

We sincerely appreciate the time and effort you have dedicated to reviewing our work. Your comments have been invaluable in helping us improve the quality and clarity of our paper. Below, we have addressed each of your comments and outlined the revisions we have made in response to your suggestions.

Sincerely,

Yuyang Tian

College of Creative Arts,University Technology Mara (Uitm), Shah Alam, Selangor, Malaysia

Attachment

Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.pdf

pone.0326186.s002.pdf (1.7MB, pdf)

Decision Letter 1

Simon Dang

8 May 2025

PONE-D-24-59115R1Can Anthropomorphic Design in Beverage Packaging Enhance Impulse Buying Intention? Amazing Visual and Verbal Cues!PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Tian,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Editor's comments:

==============================

One of the reviewers still has minor concerns that require your attention. Therefore, I invite you to address what is left on the table. I look forward to receiving your revision.

==============================

Please submit your revised manuscript by Jun 22 2025 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Simon Dang, Ph.D.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

Please review your reference list to ensure that it is complete and correct. If you have cited papers that have been retracted, please include the rationale for doing so in the manuscript text, or remove these references and replace them with relevant current references. Any changes to the reference list should be mentioned in the rebuttal letter that accompanies your revised manuscript. If you need to cite a retracted article, indicate the article’s retracted status in the References list and also include a citation and full reference for the retraction notice.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #1: All comments have been addressed

Reviewer #2: (No Response)

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Partly

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: N/A

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: I have no further comments on this version, and I wish you all the best with your publication and ongoing research.

Reviewer #2: The authors have made great efforts to revise the paper as such the quality of the paper has been dramatically improved. I just have one concern:

While the authors stated that they examined the CMV using ULMC method, I did not find the results in the manuscript. While the authors claimed that the results can be found in Lines 647 – 781, I still could not find them. Please follow the following approach to test CMV via ULMC and provide results in a table: Comparing the model fit indices such as CMIN/df, CFI, GFI, TLI, RMSEA, SRMR of the (1) measurement model, (2) measurement model with a ULMC, and (3) model with all items under 1 construct.

Good luck!

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: Yes: Trong Huu Nguyen

Reviewer #2: No

**********

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

PLoS One. 2025 Jun 16;20(6):e0326186. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0326186.r005

Author response to Decision Letter 2


12 May 2025

Dear Reviewers,

We sincerely appreciate the time and effort you have dedicated to reviewing our manuscript. We are grateful for your constructive feedback, which has significantly improved the quality of our paper. Below, we provide our point-by-point responses to the reviewers’ comments and outline the revisions made to address their concerns. We have carefully addressed all the reviewers’ comments and believe the revised manuscript has been significantly improved. Thank you once again for your time and constructive feedback. We hope the current version meets the journal’s standards for publication. Should you have any further questions or require additional revisions, we would be happy to accommodate them.

Sincerely,

Yuyang Tian

College of Creative Arts, University Technology Mara (Uitm), Malaysia

Attachment

Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers-5.12.docx

pone.0326186.s003.docx (245.3KB, docx)

Decision Letter 2

Simon Dang

27 May 2025

Can Anthropomorphic Design in Beverage Packaging Enhance Impulse Buying Intention? Amazing Visual and Verbal Cues!

PONE-D-24-59115R2

Dear Dr. Tian,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice will be generated when your article is formally accepted. Please note, if your institution has a publishing partnership with PLOS and your article meets the relevant criteria, all or part of your publication costs will be covered. Please make sure your user information is up-to-date by logging into Editorial Manager at Editorial Manager® and clicking the ‘Update My Information' link at the top of the page. If you have any questions relating to publication charges, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Simon Dang, Ph.D.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #2: All comments have been addressed

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #2: All my comments have been addressed. In this case I have no further concerns and recommend publication.

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #2: No

**********

Acceptance letter

Simon Dang

PONE-D-24-59115R2

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Tian,

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now being handed over to our production team.

At this stage, our production department will prepare your paper for publication. This includes ensuring the following:

* All references, tables, and figures are properly cited

* All relevant supporting information is included in the manuscript submission,

* There are no issues that prevent the paper from being properly typeset

You will receive further instructions from the production team, including instructions on how to review your proof when it is ready. Please keep in mind that we are working through a large volume of accepted articles, so please give us a few days to review your paper and let you know the next and final steps.

Lastly, if your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at customercare@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Simon Dang

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    S1 Appendix. Further details regarding the anthropomorphic design of this study.

    (PDF)

    pone.0326186.s001.pdf (1.6MB, pdf)
    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.pdf

    pone.0326186.s002.pdf (1.7MB, pdf)
    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers-5.12.docx

    pone.0326186.s003.docx (245.3KB, docx)

    Data Availability Statement

    The dataset of this study has been uploaded to the public database Mendeley Data at DOI: 10.17632/tdvycymws7.1 (https://data.mendeley.com/datasets/tdvycymws7/1).


    Articles from PLOS One are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES