Decoding Ingredient Preferences: The Implicit-Explicit Approach to Consumer Behavior

By Dave Lundahl, Founder and CEO at InsightsNow, and Greg Stuck, CRO at InsightsNow 

Key Takeaways: 

• Traditional consumer research methods are insufficient today, as purchasing decisions are influenced by both conscious and unconscious factors, particularly when it comes to ingredient preferences.
• The perception of ingredients is increasingly shaped by social media and cultural influences rather than scientific evidence, leading to the rise of “no-no” lists and clean-label demands from consumers.
• Implicit-explicit testing, which measures both System 1 (emotional, automatic) and System 2 (rational, deliberate) thinking, provides businesses with deeper insights into consumer behavior than traditional surveys alone.

In today’s fast-paced world, understanding consumer behavior is more complex than ever. As consumers become increasingly aware of the ingredients in the products they buy, their choices are driven by more than just knowledge — it’s about emotions, experiences, and the evolving digital landscape. Traditional methods, like asking consumers directly about their preferences, can’t capture the full picture. To truly understand what shapes their decisions, businesses need to look deeper, tapping into both conscious and subconscious consumer reactions.

The changing landscape of ingredient perceptions

Gone are the days when ingredient perceptions were shaped solely by science or corporate messaging. Today, social media influencers and online communities hold more sway than traditional experts, and this shift has given rise to a more skeptical consumer. Consumers now question not just what’s in their products, but also the intentions behind those ingredients. This emotional response has led to the rise of “no-no” lists — curated by retailers to meet the demand for clean-label products. These lists reflect a complex mix of cultural and social forces, rather than just scientific evidence.

For businesses aiming to decode consumer behavior, this shift means they can’t just rely on surveys asking what consumers say they want. To truly understand ingredient preferences, companies must tap into the subconscious — those intuitive reactions that drive consumer decisions.

The power of implicit testing

The gap between what consumers say they want and the choices they make is where implicit-explicit testing comes in. While a survey might show a preference, the actual purchasing decision often tells a different story. By measuring both conscious preferences and subconscious associations, businesses can uncover the hidden motives influencing consumer behavior.

Implicit testing goes beyond what consumers can articulate. It taps into automatic, instinctive reactions toward certain ingredients, offering insights that are often missed by traditional research methods. Results can reveal how ingredients can play different roles in different contexts. An ingredient that may be seen as a “health hero” by one consumer segment could be avoided by another for reasons like sustainability concerns, ethical considerations, or cultural influences.

Context matters: the localized influence of ingredient perceptions

Ingredient preferences are never static — they’re deeply shaped by context. As media becomes more fragmented and localized, the influence of cultural narratives and influencers is amplified. 

Take stevia, for example. In some regions or product categories, it might be embraced, while in others, it’s viewed with skepticism. Understanding how ingredient perceptions shift based on geography, culture, and situation is crucial for companies looking to create products that resonate with specific consumer segments.

The implicit-explicit approach allows businesses to navigate these complexities. It reveals not just how people feel about ingredients, but how context influences those feelings. This insight helps companies tailor their messaging about products or how ingredients are named in contexts specific to various consumer groups.

The role of System 1 and System 2 thinking

The implicit-explicit approach draws on two different types of thinking: quick, emotional reactions (System 1 thinking) and slower, more deliberate analysis (System 2 thinking). System 1 is automatic and driven by ingrained associations, while System 2 involves careful evaluation and rational analysis.

Traditional methods often rely on average response speed to infer whether a decision is intuitive or rational. InsightsNow’s patented implicit-explicit testing captures which mode of thinking participants are using when reacting positively or negatively to an ingredient or product in a given context. By measuring which mode is being used at the participant level, market level metrics can be generated about the rationality and/or intuitiveness of reactions and decisions associated with ingredient preferences. This insight provides a deep understanding of what consumers truly feel — not just what they say.

A new era of consumer understanding

As ingredient perceptions continue to evolve, businesses need tools that offer more than just surface-level insights. The implicit-explicit approach provides a nuanced understanding of consumer preferences, helping businesses stay ahead of trends and uncover hidden truths that can inform product development, marketing strategies, and brand loyalty.

By embracing the implicit-explicit testing, companies can better align their products with the deep-seated desires of today’s sophisticated, informed consumers. This approach goes beyond asking what consumers want; it uncovers the unconscious forces driving their decisions, giving businesses a competitive edge. In an age where trust is hard to earn, understanding both emotional and rational responses to ingredients is crucial for building credibility and fostering long-term loyalty.

Dr. Dave Lundahl founded InsightsNow in 2003 to help brands drive success through consumer behavior change. An expert in product strategy and design, he pioneered “tilting” innovation for sustainability. Formerly a Food Science professor at Oregon State, he now serves on its advisory boards in food science and business marketing.