Searching for the premium beer sound

Paula Almiron-Chamadoira, Francisco Jose Barbosa Escobar, Abhishek Pathak, Charles Spence, Carlos Velasco*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journal/Conference contribution in journal/Contribution to newspaperJournal articleResearchpeer-review

10 Downloads (Pure)


Premiumness is defined as a higher quality and more expensive variant of a product than other members of the category or reference class. Research suggests that brand associations such as premiumness can be effectively conveyed by means of different sensory cues or brand touchpoints (e.g., colours, sounds, weight). However, to date, research linking the sound of a product’s packaging with premiumness is sparse. In the present study, we demonstrate for the first time that consumers can infer different levels of beer premiumness based on the sounds of opening and pouring of bottles and cans. We report the results of two online experiments. Experiment 1 explored the effect of two sound properties, namely sound pressure level and frequency, associated with beer can and bottle opening and pouring on premiumness perception. Experiment 2 used semantic differential scales (e.g., good-bad, passive-active) in order to evaluate the meanings that people associated with different auditory cues. The analyses revealed that participants perceive: 1) bottle opening sounds to be more premium than can opening sounds, and 2) higher pressure sounds (both opening and pouring) as more premium than the lower pressure sounds. Additionally, premiumness was positively correlated with semantic differentials of dead-alive, and the evaluative terms of sad-happy, awful-nice, and bad-good, highlighting the premium value of the beer and its perceived quality conveyed
through sound.
Original languageEnglish
Article number104088
JournalFood Quality and Preference
Number of pages9
Publication statusPublished - Mar 2021


Dive into the research topics of 'Searching for the premium beer sound'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this