How Big Is “Tall”?

To make their products stand out, or seem to deliver more value for their size, companies often invent evocative labels like Super Size, Value Size, Double Gulp, and Whopper. To discourage consumers from making direct brand comparisons, businesses also create ambiguous portion sizes like Tall, Sixteen, and Power. The question is, do these labels mean the same thing to everyone? My colleagues—Nilufer Aydinoglu and Brian Wansink—and I have found that consumers do share a common understanding of product labels, placing many of the labels in unique and consistent positions relative to one another. In an initial study, we looked at consumers’ perceptions of product sizes in two food categories. Within each category, we chose 14 common labels, some of which were conventional (such as small, medium, and large), others of which were invented by marketers (such as Super Quencher and Big Kids). Study participants were asked to arrange the labels in each category on a scale from smallest to largest, left to right. For many labels, the subjects’ perceptions about the product sizes were significantly similar. For example, consumers agreed that “petite” is smaller than “short,” that “single” falls between “small” and “medium,” and that “tall” is larger than “medium” or “double.” Super Quencher and Jumbo tied in consumers’ minds (statistically) for sheer—apparent—size. Because consumers form clear ideas about product size on the basis of labels, we wondered whether their perceptions of serving size—regardless of actual size—would affect how much of a product they ate. In a separate study, we served Rotary Club members individually packed eight-ounce portions of eggs, labeled either medium or large. Those given medium portions ate, on average, 35% more than those whose portions were labeled as large. The Rotarians’ perceptions had obviously influenced their behavior. Companies should test whether their own views of their product labels match their customers’ perceptions and whether the labels achieve what they’re supposed to. Do you want to convey that even your small sizes are big? Then a label like “single” is better than a label like “petite.” Starbucks understood this when it labeled its smallest coffee “tall.” And don’t assume that consumers think “extra large” is the biggest. Finally, consider how your labels can affect consumption: Would some of your customers buy two servings of your product if it were “regular” instead of “large”?

How Big Is “Tall”?

Partner Center