Changing the perception of bioplastics

Master Thesis (2012)
Contributor(s)

E. Karana – Mentor

R.P. Koster – Mentor

Copyright
© 2012 Nijkamp, E.J.S.
More Info
expand_more
Publication Year
2012
Copyright
© 2012 Nijkamp, E.J.S.
Reuse Rights

Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download, forward or distribute the text or part of it, without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license such as Creative Commons.

Abstract

Bioplastics change the way plastics are made because they are manufactured from plants like corn and sugar instead of oil. This has many environmental advantages and in the future also financial advantages. Bioplastics are rapidly being developed and applied in various kinds of products. The challenge of this thesis was to understand bioplastics and to investigate how to change a materials perception by changing its sensorial properties. To change the perception of a material it is important to understand what the current perception of it is. By comparing these results to the envisioned perception -natural and high quality- the next step of investigation was to change three sensorial properties of the material and see what effect it had on the preferred image. Qualitative research showed that bioplastics are badly recognizable for consumers or they have never heard of them. However consumers expect the material to look less quality. Since the envisioned perception of the material was high quality and natural a gap needed to be crossed. The conflicting properties between natural and high quality were on smooth and rough, reflective and not reflective and fibers and no fibers. This resulted in twelve materials which were incorporated in two products and rated by 70 participants. They rated that fibers and not reflective materials positively influenced naturalness. Reflectiveness and smoothness positively influenced quality. The stiffness of a material had a larger influence on quality then the presence of fibers. All effects were larger when applied to fibered materials then to materials that had no visible fibers in them. The influence of a product on the perception of a material was small and only applied for strange on rough materials, modern on no fiber materials and quality on no fiber and rough and reflective materials. The materials that were rated highest on both natural and high quality were fibered & smooth materials both reflective and not reflective. The final evaluation study focussed on consumer behaviour and the question if consumers were willing to buy a material with fibers. This qualittive study shows that some consumers are willing to buy the material because they think it look different, feels nice or provides better functionality to the product. The guidelines that were created were designed to aid a professionals in applying the right finish to the material to get the intended perception. 1. The influence of information. Providing information to the consumer will help them to take bioplastics into consideration. 2. Influencing the quality perception. The quality of a material can be improved by making it heavier, smoother, reflective and stiffer. 3. Influencing the perception of naturalness. The naturalness of a material can be imporved by adding fibers or by making it not reflective, heavy and opaque. 4. High quality & natural. The most natural and highest quality material was a fibered, not reflective and smooth material. 5. The influence of colour. Colour has a strong influence on consumer preference. It can aslo affect the naturalness and quality perception of a material. 6. Applying to long term products. More bioplastics should be applied in long term products to show consumers the material in a durable context. These guidelines can be used to create bioplastics that consumers will prefer over traditional plastics.

Files

License info not available

Download not available

License info not available

Download not available

License info not available

Download not available

License info not available

Download not available

Poster_Nijkamp_1267272.pdf
(pdf | 5.09 Mb)
License info not available

Download not available