A USER-CENTERED APPROACH INTEGRATING AN INTERACTIVE 
PRODUCT SYSTEM INTO THE DESIGN OF A GROCERY SHOPPING 
EXPERIENCE 
 
by 
 
Lauren Jean Weigel 
 
 
 
 
A thesis submitted to the Graduate Faculty of 
Auburn University 
in partial fulfillment of the 
requirements for the Degree of 
Master of Industrial Design 
 
Auburn, Alabama 
December 18, 2009 
 
 
 
 
Keywords: nutrition, health, smart technologies,  
grocery 
 
Copyright 2009 by Lauren Jean Weigel 
 
 
Approved by 
 
Tsailu Liu, Chair, Associate Professor of Industrial Design 
Christopher Arnold, Associate Professor of Industrial Design 
Shea Tillman, Assistant Professor of Industrial Design 
Jerrod Windham, Assistant Professor of Industrial Design 
ii 
Abstract 
 
 
 Health conditions in the United States are continuing to rise. Many of these health 
conditions can be resolved or suppressed by making healthier food decisions. People rely 
on Nutrition Fact Labels to give them information about what they are eating. For many 
people, Nutrition Fact Labels are not easy to understand sources of nutritional 
information. The increase in interactive smart technologies allows information to be 
communicated in new ways. This purpose of this thesis is to explain how an interactive 
smart technology system can be applied to a grocery shopping experience to provide 
people with specific, meaningful information about what they are purchasing. The paper 
will focus on those individuals with health conditions who have strict nutritional 
guidelines that they have to follow. If an individual is unable to easily understand 
nutritional information, and they purchase a product with a specific ingredient that they 
have been instructed to avoid, their health condition may be aggravated. This study 
includes research about they way people shop. The study also includes research 
identifying what nutritional information is important to people with health conditions. 
The result of this research is an interactive system that provides people with more 
meaningful information about their experiences while grocery shopping.  
 
 
 
ii 
Table of Contents 
 
 
Abstract............................................................................................................................... ii 
List of Figures.................................................................................................................... iv  
Chapter 1: Introduction  ......................................................................................................1 
 Opportunity Statement.............................................................................................1 
 Need for Study  .......................................................................................................3 
 Objectives of Study..................................................................................................3 
 Definitions of Terms  ..............................................................................................4 
 Literature Review.....................................................................................................9 
RFID Integration..........................................................................................9 
A Changing Grocery Shopping Experience...............................................11
Grocery Cart Innovations...........................................................................11 
 Assumptions of Study............................................................................................16 
 Scope and Limits  ..................................................................................................16 
 Procedures and Methods........................................................................................16 
 Anticipated Outcome  ...........................................................................................18 
Chapter 2: Introduction to Research  ................................................................................19 
 Overview................................................................................................................19 
 Product Packaging .................................................................................................19 
Communicating Product Information ........................................................20.........  
 iii 
History of Product Packaging  ..................................................................21 
Standardizations in Product Packaging......................................................27 
 The Universal Product Code..................................................................................28 
 Nutrition Labels .....................................................................................................28 
Challenges with Understanding Nutrition Fact Labels..............................29 
Solutions to Help Consumers Understand Nutrition Labels......................31 
 Summary of Chapter  ............................................................................................31 
Chapter 3: Smart Technologies  ........................................................................................32 
 Overview................................................................................................................32 
 Future Trends in Packaging Design.......................................................................32 
 Available Technologies .........................................................................................33 
Checkout Smartshop ..................................................................................34 
Red Laser ...................................................................................................34 
Quick Response Codes ..............................................................................34 
ScanLife Codes ..........................................................................................35 
 RFID (Radio Frequency Identification) Technology.............................................35 
Wal-Mart and RFID...................................................................................38 
Supply Chain and RFID.............................................................................39 
Product Authenticity and RFID .................................................................41 
 Consumer Advantages and Smart Packaging ........................................................42 
 Marketing Benefits and Smart Packaging..............................................................43 
 Smart Packaging and Consumer Responsibility....................................................44 
 Consumer Disadvantages and Smart Packaging....................................................44 
 iv
 Consumers Against Supermarket Privacy and Numbering ...................................44 
 Smart Packaging and The Shopping Experience...................................................45 
 Summary of Chapter..............................................................................................46 
Chapter 4: Health Statistics................................................................................................47 
 Overview................................................................................................................47 
 Do Consumers Understand Nutrition Fact Labels? ...............................................48 
 Food Labeling to Advance Better Education for Life (FLABEL).........................49 
 Food Pyramid.........................................................................................................49 
 Population Averages ..............................................................................................58 
Diabetes......................................................................................................61 
Cholesterol .................................................................................................63 
Heart Disease .............................................................................................63 
Food Allergies............................................................................................64 
Dieting........................................................................................................66 
Cancer ........................................................................................................67 
Obesity .......................................................................................................68 
 Summary of Chapter..............................................................................................70 
Chapter 5: Grocery Shopping Experience .........................................................................71 
 Overview................................................................................................................71 
 History of the Grocery Store..................................................................................71 
 Trends in Grocery Shopping..................................................................................74 
 Ways of Targeting Consumers in the Grocery Store.............................................74 
Coupons .....................................................................................................75 
 v 
Store Cards.................................................................................................75 
 Interactive Marketing Effectiveness ......................................................................76 
 The ?Immunity Factor?..........................................................................................77 
 Specifically Targeted Marketing in an Isolated Society........................................78 
 Summary of Chapter..............................................................................................79 
Chapter 6: How People Shop.............................................................................................80 
 Overview................................................................................................................80 
 Sarah ......................................................................................................................81 
 Johanna ..................................................................................................................88 
 Cathy......................................................................................................................93 
 Pat ..........................................................................................................................99 
 Interviews.............................................................................................................106 
 Summary of Chapter............................................................................................107 
Chapter 7: Design Development......................................................................................108 
 Overview..............................................................................................................108 
 Creating an Interface from User Research...........................................................108 
 Developing a Personal Interaction.......................................................................111 
 Interface Organization .........................................................................................113 
 How the Interactive Product System Works........................................................116 
 Interface Design...................................................................................................117 
 Scenario One: Interface Design for User with Diabetes......................................121 
 Scenario Two: Interface Design for User with Food Allergies ...........................124 
 Scenario Three: Interface Design for User with a Budget...................................127 
 vi
 Scenario Four: Interface Design for Store Marketing..........................................130 
 Sketch Development of Portable Device .............................................................132 
 Prototyping and Form Development of Portable Device.....................................134 
 Computer Modeling of Portable Device..............................................................135 
 Sketch Development of In-Store Device .............................................................137 
 Prototyping and Form Development of In-Store Device.....................................139 
 Computer Modeling of In-Store Device ..............................................................139 
Chapter 8: Conclusions....................................................................................................143 
 Summary of Study ...............................................................................................143 
 Study Accomplishments ......................................................................................143 
 Future Applications..............................................................................................144 
 
 
References  ......................................................................................................................145 
ii 
List of Figures 
 
 
Figure 1: Estimated Prevalence of Diabetes ........................................................................2 
Figure 2: Samples of Consumer Products Contamination and Results ............................10 
Figure 3: IDEO Shopping Cart .........................................................................................12 
Figure 4: Mediacart ...........................................................................................................13 
Figure 5: Cart Motion Map................................................................................................14 
Figure 6: Stop and Shop UPC Scanner .............................................................................15 
Figure 7: Packaging Definitions Summary .......................................................................20 
Figure 8: Definitions of a Brand .......................................................................................24 
Figure 9: The Role of Packaging in Creating a Brand ......................................................25 
Figure 10: Evolution of Consumer Confidence ................................................................27 
Figure 11: Nutrition Fact Label ........................................................................................29 
Figure 12: Redlaser ...........................................................................................................34 
Figure 13: ScanLife Codes with Quick Response Codes .................................................35 
Figure 14: RFID Chip .......................................................................................................36 
Figure 15: Chicken-and-Egg Problem ..............................................................................39 
Figure 16: Supply Chain and RFID Technology vs. Traditional Supply Chain ...............41 
Figure 17: Early U.S. Nutrition Guides ............................................................................50 
Figure 18: 1894-1940 Nutritional Propaganda ..................................................................51 
Figure 19: Early World War II Food Guide ......................................................................52 
 iii 
Figure 20: Early Recommended Daily Intake Guide ........................................................53 
Figure 21: 1943-1955 Food Guide ....................................................................................53 
Figure 22: 1956-1979 Food Guide ....................................................................................54 
Figure 23: 1979-1984 Food Guide ....................................................................................55 
Figure 24: 1990 Dietary Guidelines ..................................................................................56 
Figure 25: Food Pyramid ..................................................................................................57 
Figure 26: MyPyramid ......................................................................................................58 
Figure 27: U.S. Caloric Requirements...............................................................................60 
Figure 28: Estimated Diabetes Prevalence .......................................................................61 
Figure 29: Millions of People with Diabetes ....................................................................64 
Figure 30: Percentage of Children with Reported Food Allergy ......................................65 
Figure 31: Cancer Mortality in the U.S. ...........................................................................67 
Figure 32: Percentage of Obesity in U.S. Adults ..............................................................68 
Figure 33: U.S. Adult Obesity ..........................................................................................69 
Figure 34: First Self-Service Grocery Store .....................................................................72 
Figure 35: Evolution of Grocery Store .............................................................................73 
Figure 36: User Research Questionnaire ..........................................................................80 
Figure 37: Complete User Research Questionnaire ..........................................................81 
Figure 38: Sarah 1 .............................................................................................................83 
Figure 39: Sarah 2 .............................................................................................................84 
Figure 40: Sarah 3 .............................................................................................................85 
Figure 41: Sarah 4 .............................................................................................................86 
Figure 42: Sarah 5 .............................................................................................................87 
 iv
Figure 43: Sarah 6 .............................................................................................................88 
Figure 44: Johanna 1 .........................................................................................................90 
Figure 45: Johanna 2 .........................................................................................................91 
Figure 46: Johanna 3 .........................................................................................................92 
Figure 47: Johanna 4 .........................................................................................................92 
Figure 48: Cathy 1 ............................................................................................................94 
Figure 49: Cathy 2 ............................................................................................................95 
Figure 50: Cathy 3 ............................................................................................................96 
Figure 51: Cathy 4 ............................................................................................................97 
Figure 52: Cathy 5 ............................................................................................................98 
Figure 53: Cathy 6 .............................................................................................................99 
Figure 54: Pat 1 ...............................................................................................................101 
Figure 55: Pat 2 ...............................................................................................................102 
Figure 56: Pat 3 ...............................................................................................................103 
Figure 57: Pat 4 ...............................................................................................................104 
Figure 58: Pat 5 ...............................................................................................................105 
Figure 59: Pat 6 ...............................................................................................................106 
Figure 60: Shopper Desires vs. Shopper Frustrations .....................................................109 
Figure 61: User Research to Interface ............................................................................110 
Figure 62: Scenarios to Interface Vehicles ......................................................................111 
Figure 63: Fact-to-Face Personal Interaction ..................................................................112 
Figure 64: Impersonal Grocery Store Interaction ...........................................................113 
Figure 65: Shopper-Marketing Channel Relationship ....................................................113 
 v 
Figure 66: Interface Scenario Flow Chart .......................................................................115 
Figure 67: How the Device Works .................................................................................116 
Figure 68: Interface ?Tools/Settings? Tab ......................................................................118 
Figure 69: Device Interface ?Hello Page? and ?Profile Page? ........................................119 
Figure 70: ?New Profile Page? and ?Select User Page? .................................................120 
Figure 71: Interface Warning...........................................................................................122 
Figure 72: Alternative Item Recommendation Interface ................................................123 
Figure 73: Item Mapping Interface .................................................................................124 
Figure 74: Interface Warning ..........................................................................................125 
Figure 75: Alternative Item Recommendation Interface ................................................126 
Figure 76: Item Mapping Interface .................................................................................127 
Figure 77: Budgeting Interface Item Selection................................................................128 
Figure 78: Budgeting Interface From List .......................................................................129 
Figure 79: Budgeting Interface .......................................................................................130 
Figure 80: Coupon Interface ............................................................................................131 
Figure 81: Recipe Interface..............................................................................................132 
Figure 82: Initial Form Exploration.................................................................................133 
Figure 83: Sketch Development for One-Handed Device ...............................................133 
Figure 84: Portable Device Foam Model.........................................................................134 
Figure 85: Portable Device Foam Model Back View......................................................135 
Figure 86: Computer Model of Portable Device..............................................................136 
Figure 87: Rendered Portable Device..............................................................................136 
Figure 88: Initial Sketch Development of In-Store Device .............................................137 
 vi
Figure 89: Thumbnail Ideation Sketches .........................................................................138 
Figure 90: Refined In-Store Device Sketches..................................................................138 
Figure 91: Full-Scale Sketch Prototype of In-Store Device ............................................139 
Figure 92: First Version Computer Model.......................................................................140 
Figure 93: Cart Computer Model Version 2....................................................................141 
Figure 94: Rendered Computer Model of Cart................................................................142 
Figure 95: Rendered Computer Model of Cart in Grocery Store ....................................142 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 

CHAPTER 1:  INTRODUCTION TO PROBLEM 
Opportunity Statement
 Health conditions have grown rapidly in the United States in the past few decades. 
Obesity is one of the fastest growing epidemics in the United States. ?In 2008, only one 
state (Colorado) had a prevalence of obesity less than 20%? (Centers For Disease Control 
and Prevention, 2009).  The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2009) describes 
the United States as ?obesogenic?, meaning a society that is ?characterized by 
environments that promote increased food intake, non-healthful foods, and physical 
inactivity? (Centers For Disease Control and Prevention). In 2004, a national survey 
revealed ??one-third of adult Americans, or 71 million, are currently on a diet? (Calorie 
Control Council). Studies in the 1990s revealed ?...on any given day, almost half of the 
women in the United States are on a diet?(and) one in four men are on a diet? (?The 
Average American,? 2009).  The Food Allergy and Anaphylaxis Network (2009) has 
determined that ?more than 12 million Americans have food allergies? (The Food Allergy 
& Anaphylaxis Network).  The National Diabetes Information Clearinghouse (2007) 
estimates that 23.6 million Americans have diabetes. 

 

 
Figure 1. Estimated Prevalence of Diabetes (National Diabetes Information 
Clearinghouse, 2007) 
Many experts conclude that these health conditions can be exacerbate and even 
caused by poor diet. Nutrition fact labeling has been standardized and enforced by the 
federal government on all food packaging, yet statistics show that many Americans are 
confused when reading nutrition labels. A study conducted to find out how well 
Americans comprehend nutrition fact labels revealed that ?Only 32 percent could 
correctly calculate the amount of carbohydrates consumed in a 20-ounce bottle of soda 
that had 2.5 servings in the bottle. Only 60 percent could calculate the number of 
carbohydrates consumed if they ate half a bagel when the serving size was a whole 
bagel? (Reinberg, 2006). Meaningful information about nutrition is not accessible to 
Americans. 

 

Need for Study 
 There is a need to create a product that can provide people with easy to 
understand, meaningful nutritional information that relates to their health conditions and 
dietary needs. People need to be able to easily access this information during their 
shopping experience. People cannot be expected to rely exclusively on their memory of 
appropriate proportions of nutrients that they need. With new technologies in product 
packaging developing, there is an opportunity to make meaningful information available.  
Packages and products have the potential to ?talk? to consumers, giving them information 
during the shopping experience and throughout the life of the product. Products have the 
potential of becoming interactive instead of passive, benefiting the manufacturer, retailer, 
and consumer.   
Objectives of Study 
The objectives of this thesis are to: 
? Research health problems that are linked to the consumption of unhealthy foods. 
? Examine the effectiveness of current product labeling systems.  
? Define modern product packaging and examine the future of product packaging.   
? Examine a ?talking? product system and look at how this technology could 
benefit people and change the shopping experience. 
? Look at existing technologies that could make a ?talking? product system 
possible. 

 

? Design a device that could exist in a ?talking? product system. 
Definition of Terms 
Product Packaging - a container designed to provide information to the user,  protection 
to the product during transportation through the supply chain, a surface for marketing and 
advertising, security, ease of transportation, protection from theft, and protection from 
environmental damage. 
Modern Packaging  - packaging that is more informative, interactive, and influential than 
packaging developed before the early twentieth century.  
Personality ? an individual?s actual self that is not obstructed by false personas.  
Personas ? false representations of a person?s personality that allows the individual to 
appear more socially acceptable and help them achieve their internal intentions. Carl 
Jung, a Swiss psychologist, developed this term. 
Individuation ? a process developed by Carl Jung that allowed individuals to project their 
true personalities instead of false personas.  
Consumer Confidence ? a shopper?s trust in a product and/or brand 
Brand Standardization ? a consistent visual language used by a company to define its 
product line(s) that allows a consumer to identify a product as belonging to a particular 
brand.  

 

Universal Product Code (UPC)  -  a code developed in 1969 to act as an ?interindustry 
product code? (GS1 US, 2006). The code is used by retailers to keep track of their 
inventory. It also helps move consumers through lines faster. 
Brand ? a company?s identity communicated through standardized visual cues and 
marketing techniques. The brand becomes a representation of who the company is. 
Quick Response Code ? a visual code that is used as a way to store information. A cell 
phone camera can decode it.  
Automatic Identification technologies ? technologies that allow one individual to be 
specifically identified and differentiated from other individuals. 
Optical character reader  - a device used to scan a code and translate its information into 
text. 
Biometric technologies  - technologies that allow biometric data to be collected (i.e. 
finger print scanning devices, retinal scans). 
Retinal scans ? biometric technology that scans a person?s retina as a way of identifying 
him or her. 
Electronic Product Codes (EPCs) ? tracking technology used by retailers or 
manufacturers to locate goods through the supply chain. 
Optically Scanned ? a way of taking a visual code and translating it into information that 
can be utilized by a computer. This task is performed by an optical reader.  

 

Biometric Data ? information that identifies and individual, like a photograph of a 
fingerprint, without revealing the individual?s name. 
Transponder ? the antenna of a Radio Frequency Identification chip. 
Tag ? another term used to refer to the antenna of a Radio Frequency Identification chip. 
Uniform Code Council/GS1 US ? an organization that creates international standardized 
coding systems with a goal to optimize supply chains. 
European Article Number- a barcode created by the Uniform Code Council/GS1 US used 
to differentiate products and track them through the supply chain. 
Auto-ID Center ? a department at Massachusetts Institute of Technology that is 
developing Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) Technology and RFID chips.  
UHF Spectrum ? a system where products and a Radio Frequency Identification chip are 
attached to the pallet allowing the pallet to be scanned while moving through a dock. 
Product Authenticity ? a guarantee to consumers that the product?s stated manufacturer 
has actually fabricated the product.  
Smart Packaging ? packaging that has an information tag, like an RFID tag, attached to it, 
allowing the consumer and the product to interact.  
Internet of Things ? an idea that if all packaging were smart packaging, consumers would 
be able to keep a household or personal inventory of everything they own. 

 

Self-Service Store ? way of modern shopping where a consumer is able to collect all of 
the items he or she needs by themselves without needing an attendant to retrieve certain 
behind-the-counter items. 
Groceteria ? another term for a self-service store. 
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) ? a government agency responsible for 
food and agriculture policy. 
Food Labeling to Advance Better Education for Life (FLABEL) ? a European 
organization dedicated to researching the effectiveness of nutrition fact labeling. 
Nutrition Fact Label- a government-enforced product label required on food packaging. 
The Nutrition Fact Label was part of the Nutrition Labeling and Education Act that was 
passed in 1990.  
Air Interface Protocol - guidelines for how RFID tags and the reader communicate. 
Obesity- having a Body Mass Index (BMI) of 30 or higher. 
Body Mass Index (BMI) ? a height-to-weight ratio that is used to determine overall 
health. 
Obesogenic- a society that is inflicted with unhealthy eating habits and a lack of physical 
activity. 
Anaphylaxis- allergic reaction induced by the consumption of a food that the body 
rejects. The reaction is often rapid and can be fatal. 

 

Sedentary- a lifestyle defined by inactivity.  
The Four Food Groups  -  nutritional guidelines released by the United States government 
after World War II. The guidelines included the following four groups: meat, vegetables, 
dairy, and grains. 
The Hassle-Free Daily Food Guide - nutritional guidelines released by the United States 
government in the late 1970s to early 1980s. The guide listed seven food groups: 
vegetables and fruit; bread and cereal; milk and cheese; meat, poultry, fish, and beans; 
and fats and sweets. 
MyPyramid- the most recent nutritional suggestions made by the United States 
government and displayed in a graphical format. MyPyramid was released to consumers 
in 2005. 
Diabetes  - a group of diseases marked by high levels of blood glucose resulting from 
defects in insulin production, insulin action, or both (Center for Disease Control). 
Pre-diabetes ? increased blood glucose levels that are not high enough to be considered 
diabetes; this stage of diabetes can be managed by making healthy food choices. 
Calorie  - a unit of measurement used in determining the nutritional value of a food. 
Type 2 Diabetes ? a condition where the body does not produce enough insulin; this lack 
of insulin has to be replaced with synthetic insulin to keep blood sugar levels at a normal 
level. 

 

Immunity Factor ? the idea that the more saturated the network becomes, the more likely 
that people will avoid the network because of its lack of genuine connection. 
Fax Effect - the idea that the more people you have in a given network, the more valuable 
that network becomes.  
Literature Review 
 RFID technology and other smart technologies are gaining popularity in new 
markets. Smart technologies are beginning to be considered in grocery store and food-
related applications. Most existing smart technology applications in a grocery store 
system or a food-related system primarily benefit the company selling the products to the 
consumer. Smart technology applications that directly benefit the user are not as 
prevalent in the market. 
RFID Integration 
 ?Food safety is a top-of-mind issue around the world today. In the U.S. alone, the 
Centers for Disease Control estimates that 76 million Americans become ill, more than 
300,000 are hospitalized, and 5,000 die each year from food-borne illness? (InSync 
Software Collaborates With IBM to Improve Food Safety, 2009). 
 

 

 
Figure 2. Samples of Consumer Products Contamination and Recalls (Do You Know 
Where That?s Been?) 
IBM is using RFID technology to track food through the supply chain (InSync 
Software Collaborates With IBM to Improve Food Safety, 2009). The food tracking 
system is intended to reduce waste, create more efficient supply chains, and provide 
people with safer food (A Healthy Appetite for Innovation). ?Consumers are hungrier 
than ever for information about their food. They are better informed about nutrition and 
more aware of the environmental and societal impacts of everything they buy? (A 
Healthy Appetite for Innovation, para. 2). RFID technology will allow IBM?s Smart Food 
system to provide a more efficient supply chain and give consumers the information they 
need to make safe food decisions (A Healthy Appetite for Innovation). The Smart Food 
System gives consumers reassurance that their food is safe; however, it does not provide 
consumers with nutritional information or give them a way of making more healthful 
decisions.  

 

A Changing Grocery Shopping Experience 
 The grocery store shopping experience is changing. New technologies and 
systems are available to create a more interactive experience. The general manager of the 
Advertiser and Publisher Solutions Group at Microsoft has stated, ?Digital advertising 
opportunities are expanding rapidly into new areas, as many of consumers? daily 
activities, such as shopping, become increasingly ?connected?? (Mediacart, 2008). Some 
grocery stores are adopting biometric technologies. ?The smart-shopper program at the 
Green Hills Supermarket in Syracuse, N.Y., has?speeded up checkout by allowing 
customers to pay by touch with a finger-scan system? (abcNEWS.com, 2007). 
Grocery Cart Innovations 
 Grocery carts have been redesigned to accommodate shoppers and new 
technologies, providing an enhanced shopping experience. In 1998, IDEO re-designed 
the grocery shopping cart (IDEO.com, 1998). The shopping cart concept considered 
?maneuverability, shopping behavior, child safety, and maintenance cost? (IDEO.com, 
1998, para.1). The concept utilized plastic baskets that a shopper could take with him or 
her to the shelf, fill with items, and then return to the cart (IDEO.com, 1998). The cart 
also featured hooks for the shopper to hang grocery bags from when checking out 
(IDEO.com, 1998). The cart also featured a UPC scanner that the shopper could use to 
obtain information about a product (IDEO.com, 1998). 

 

 
Figure 3. IDEO Shopping Cart (IDEO.com, 1998) 
The IDEO shopping cart was built in the late nineties (IDEO.com, 1998). The 
scanning device and the barcode system does not allow the user to interact with product 
information after leaving the store. Smart technologies have advanced and allow for a 
more interactive product system.  
Microsoft and MediaCart have joined ?to offer in-store ad targeting that is both 
behavioral and takes the concept of ?location-based services? to the store aisles using 
RFID tag? (Sterling, 2008, para.1). MediaCart is a ?next-generation computerized 
shopping cart? (Mediacart, 2008, para.1). The grocery shopping cart features an attached 
computer screen and scanning device. The cart allows the shoppers to ?save time and 
money?by obtaining electronic coupons, locating products in the store, performing 
comparative price checks, viewing store specials in aisles as they shop, viewing recipes 
and nutritional information, shopping using an electronic shopping list that is presented in 
aisle order, totaling the cost of the items in their baskets before checkout, and expediting 

 

the checkout using the cart-level checkout feature? (Sterling, 2008, para. 3).  The cart 
uses a UPC scanning device, allowing the shopper to scan an item?s UPC code to obtain 
information about it (Mediacart, 2008). MediaCart would exist in a system where RFID 
scanners would be strategically positioned throughout the store to detect the presence of 
the cart and then tell the screen on the MediaCart to display an advertisement relevant to 
the aisle the cart is in (Mediacart, 2008).  
 
Figure 4. Mediacart (The Hi-tech Shopping Trolley That Tells You Where To Find 
Things in a Supermarket, 2008) 
The MediaCart gives consumers the most user-centered information; however, the 
scanning device relies on UPC barcode scanning. Scanning a barcode requires a more 
precise scan than scanning a smart technology chip. Also, the barcode limits the window 
of time that a consumer has access to product information. The consumer can only 
interface with advanced product information in the store. The barcode does not allow the 

 

products to function in a more interactive product system that can live in an individual?s 
ecosystem.  
Intelligentz has created CartMotion (Figure 5), a shopping cart monitoring system 
that uses RFID technology to generate marketing data (Intelligentz Corporation, 2009). 
?Sensors are positioned strategically and discreetly around the store perimeter to locate 
shopping carts within six inches of its precise location? (Intelligentz Corporation, 2009, 
para.2). These sensors can tell the store how long people stay in a particular aisle, or what 
path the shopper takes to navigate their way through the store (Intelligentz Corporation, 
2009). The system can also protect the store from losing shopping carts. ?The loss of 
shopping carts has been an ongoing problem that can cost stores thousands of dollars a 
year. Typically, the cart costs between $150 and $200 each? (Swedberg, 2006, para. 2). 
 
Figure 5. Cart Motion Map (Intelligentz Corporation, 2009) 

 

This type of smart technology application allows the store to see how effectively 
the strategically placed displays are marketing information to customers. However, it 
does not provide any value to the consumer.  
 Stop and Shop has incorporated a barcode scanning device (Figure 6) into its 
stores. ?Many of Stop and Shop?s 376 stores feature a variety of digital devices that let 
customers weigh their own veggies, order deli meats by using a video touch screen, and 
pay their bills without human assistance. Users weigh, scan, and bag their own purchases, 
preferably in reusable cloth bags?Good for the environment, and for the bottom line? 
(Bray, 2008, para. 3). 
 
 
Figure 6. Stop and Shop UPC Scanner (Flash, 2008) 

 

Assumptions of Study 
 It can be assumed that in this study, any information derived from books, journals, 
lectures, and the Internet is accurate. It can also be assumed that the authors or lecturers 
of this information are reliable and verifiable. It can be assumed that consumers have an 
innate relationship between meaningful information and making more informed 
decisions. Also, it is presupposed that the technology required to create a device that 
could give users meaningful information will be more readily available in the future. It is 
also presumed that health conditions like obesity, heart disease, cancer, and allergies are 
largely a result of poor diet. 
Scope and Limits 
 This study has an expected scope of research. This study focuses on developing a 
device that can be used in the grocery store. However, the application of this technology 
and product system is relevant to other types of shopping experiences. This study is 
limited, in that any surveys or observational focus groups will be conducted in Auburn, 
Alabama, and Waukesha, Wisconsin. Auburn, Alabama, and Waukesha, Wisconsin, are 
small samples of the world and they do not represent a universal view. To broaden the 
study, other resources were utilized, including books, journals, lectures, and the Internet. 
Procedures and Methods 
 The study was executed with the following procedures and methods:  
? Research health problems and statistics. 


- Examine national statistics posted online by government organizations 
that post census information about disease. 
-  Study the relationship between health problems and the consumption of 
food. 
? Research the effectiveness of product labeling. 
- Study the nutrition fact label and other standardized product labeling 
designed to inform consumers. 
- Conduct surveys on how people make food-buying decisions when 
grocery shopping. 
? Research modern product packaging and future trends. 
- Define modern product packaging and develop predictions for future 
product packaging.  
? Research the grocery shopping experience. 
- Look at how people shopped for items in the past and how they 
currently grocery shop.  
- Describe a future grocery shopping experience in a ?talking? product 
system. 
? Research smart technologies. 
- Research existing smart technologies including RFID technology. 
- Explain the user benefits of smart technologies. 
? Design development. 

 

- Sketch preliminary design concepts of a device that can provide users 
with meaningful information during their grocery shopping 
experience.  
- Finalize sketches and create a computer model of device.  
? Evaluation and review. 
- Examine the effectiveness of the device in an interactive product system.   
Anticipated Outcome 
 This study demonstrates the development of a device designed to be used in a 
?talking? product system with capabilities of bringing meaningful information to the user. 
The study establishes a method of research for a new product that does not exist, using 
unique research methods. It also shows how a smart packaging system accompanied by a 
scanning device can provide a way to give people with health conditions more 
comprehensible information that can help them make better decisions. This study also 
serves as a resource to assist others in designing new products that are developed from 
observing people?s behavior and experiences. 

 

CHAPTER 2:  INTRODUCTION TO RESEARCH 
Overview 
 Thomas Hine (1995) states ?the combination of containers with preparation and 
information makes them packages? (p.17).  Product packaging is complex in definition. 
And its definition has changed as society and technology has advanced. Chapter 2 is an 
introduction to product packaging, providing many definitions of product packaging. This 
chapter examines the development of product packaging since its inception. It also 
explores the regulations placed on product packaging by the government to provide users 
with obligatory information. 
Product Packaging
Product packaging is not easily defined. Berger (2002) states that packaging has 
four purposes: to contain products, to protect products from theft or environmental 
damage, to assist in the transportation of the product, and to display information. DuPuis 
and Silva (2008) describe packaging as having six functions: ?containment, security, 
protection, convenience, information, (and) marketing? (p.106). Some may argue that it 
also needs to instill confidence in the consumer. DuPuis and Silva (2008) define 
packaging as ?something that holds, protects, and stores its contents? (p.10). They believe 
that packaging ?occurs naturally, as in the protective covering of a banana, the cocoon of 
a butterfly, and an oyster? (Dupuis and Silva, 2008, p.10).  Dupuis and Silva (2008) 

 

explain that as societies became more advanced, more information was necessary for 
people to understand what the package contains. Hine (1995) (Figure 7) believes that 
packaging?s job is to ?preserve and protect?they are potentially expressive?they help 
those who use the item feel good about it? (p.3). The U.S. Government also attempts to 
define packaging. ?The label and packaging on products you (the manufacturer) create 
and/or sell are forms of advertising? (?Product Labeling,? 2009). 
 
 
Figure 7. Packaging Definition Summary 
Communicating Product Information 
One of the most important functions of packaging is to communicate information 
about the product to the consumer. Packaging tells consumers the brand name, the 

 

contents of the package, and the features of the product. Most non-food packaging 
includes product manuals that explain how the product is to be used, how it is to be 
assembled, and who to contact if there is a problem. Many manuals include phone 
numbers and website information that consumers can use to obtain more information 
about the product or the brand. Product packaging also contains information that can be 
utilized by the store.  
History of Product Packaging 
The origins of product packaging are not clearly defined. Berger (2002) explains 
that initially, people did not need packaging because people used all of the food that they 
caught or gathered. If something was needed to be stored it could be carried in ?gourds, 
shells, and leaves? (Berger, 2002, p. 1). Later, people used ?hollowed logs, woven 
grasses, and animal organs? (Berger, 2002, p.1). When new materials were discovered, 
people made containers from clay and metal (Dupuis & Silva, 2008). In 1500 B.C. the 
Egyptians started making glass jars (Dupuis & Silva, 2008).  Some consider this the first 
form of packaging. Glass making was a protected secret that aided in trade (Dupuis & 
Silva, 2008). Trade allowed societies to prosper and later inspired the creation of 
monetary systems (Dupuis & Silva, 2008).  The need for packaging of goods increased, 
and societies recognized the need to give products perceived value through package form 
and labeling (Dupuis & Silva, 2008).  Governments recognized that creating packages to 
preserve food gave them a military advantage (Dupuis & Silva, 2008).  Nicolas Appert 
developed an airtight seal for glass jars in 1810 (Dupuis & Silva, 2008). In the same year, 
England patented the tin can, giving its armies the ability to carry food with them into 

 

battle (Dupuis & Silva, 2008). The United States used tin cans in the Civil War; 
afterwards, tin cans became available to the public (Dupuis & Silva, 2008).  During the 
Industrial Revolution, many farmers left their land to work in the cities, and people began 
to depend on store-bought goods (Dupuis & Silva, 2008).  In 1817, the cardboard box 
was invented (Dupuis & Silva, 2008). In 1844, England developed the first commercial 
paper bags (Dupuis & Silva, 2008). When germs were discovered, packaging began to 
advertise its hygienic qualities (Dupuis & Silva, 2008). People began to trust packaging?s 
promising graphics to protect them from contamination (Dupuis & Silva, 2008). In 1858, 
New York faced ?a massive milk contamination problem from cows too close to the city 
(Dupuis & Silva, 2008, p.13). Gale Borden lived outside of the city, canned his cows? 
milk, and sold it to the public. (Dupuis & Silva, 2008). Condensed milk was perceived as 
?clean and pure? (Dupuis & Silva, 2008, p.13). The tin can packaging gave the public a 
sense of security and safety from disease (Dupuis & Silva, 2008). Henry Parsons 
Crowell, founder of Quaker Oats Company, recognized the public?s concern and 
responded by creating packaging that described Quaker Oats as pure (Dupuis & Silva, 
2008). The Quaker Oats Company printed easy recipes on the back of boxes to show the 
public that their product was easy to prepare (Dupuis & Silva, 2008). In the early 
twentieth century, grocery stores changed from a clerk behind a desk who would give the 
consumer the requested product to self-service stores. This greatly influenced packaging. 
Now, consumers would interact with a product?s packaging more than they ever had 
before. It became important for a product?s packaging to be informative, interactive and 
influential. This ?modern packaging? (Frost, 2005) reduced human interaction and 
required the package to be the source of communication. This new way of shopping 

 

reduced the overall time a shopper spent in a store. Shopping also became ?less of an 
emotional drain when shoppers no longer felt compelled to share personal information 
with the grocer each time they visited his store? (Frost, 2005). The new way of shopping 
also instilled more trust in the shoppers. Shoppers who were moving into the cities during 
the Industrial Revolution could trust a labeled package more than shopkeepers who were 
strangers to them. In 1930, Clarence Birdeye began distributing frozen food products 
(Dupuis & Silva, 2008). In 1937, the first shopping card was created (Dupuis & Silva, 
2008). Swanson introduced the first frozen TV dinner to the public in 1950 (Dupuis & 
Silva, 2008).  By the early 1970s, California introduced the recycling symbol to identify 
packaging that was made from recyclable materials (Dupuis & Silva, 2008). Soon after, 
Ohio introduced the first bar code on a Wrigley?s gum package (Dupuis & Silva, 2008). 
In 1974, Fall City Brewing Company introduced the stay-on tab on the aluminum soda 
can (Dupuis & Silva, 2008). In 1977, PETE, polyethylene terephthalate plastic, was first 
used in the manufacturing of soda bottles (Dupuis & Silva, 2008).  
Walter Landor is considered the founder of corporate identity (?Pioneer of 
Branding,? 2004).  Landor was responsible for conducting extensive research on 
consumers and how packaging influences their purchasing decisions (?Pioneer of 
Branding,? 2004).  He believed (Figure 8) that a package ?had to satisfy more than the 
accepted basic needs: protection of product, shelf impact, memorability, strong 
communication of product and brand ? to be truly consumer oriented? (?Pioneer of 
Branding,? 2004).  

 

 
Figure 8. Definition of a Brand 
Walter Landor thought that the ?brand personality expressed by the package 
should be the same personality that reached the consumer through other media? (Frost, 
2005).  Waltor Landor, along with others, believed that packaging is the same as product 
branding. Branding and packaging consultant Richard Gerstman says ?packaging is 
branding? (Frost, 2005). Gerstman believes that brand identity leads to brand promise 
(Frost, 2005). He believes that the reason people buy a brand is ?value, acceptance, and 
loyalty? (Frost, 2005). Packaging plays a large role in creating the brand?s image. It is the 
core of the brand experience, and ultimately leads to a customer?s brand loyalty. (Figure 
9) 

 

 
Figure 9. The Role of Packaging in Creating a Brand 
Others believe packaging and branding are separate entities. Darrel Rhea, 
Principal CEO of Cheskin, says  ?Packaging and branding are different things? 
(packaging) is a very important element and may even be the primary way people interact 
with the brand...? (Frost, 2005). Rhea believes that packaging should be used to reinforce 
the brand definition (Frost, 2005). 
In the beginning of the twentieth century, Carl Jung, a Swiss psychologist, began 
to define the differences between personality and persona (Frost, 2005). Jung believed 
that people create personas, false representations of their personality, that are more 
socially acceptable and help them achieve internal intentions (Frost, 2005). Jung also 
believed that people were at risk of thinking that their personas were their true personality 
(Frost, 2005). He used a process he called individuation to help patients project their true 
personalities instead of false personas (Frost, 2005). Jung said,  

 

?If man were an individual he would have an unvarying character. By identifying 
with the moment, he deceives others and himself about his real character. He 
wears a mask that he knows corresponds with his conscious intentions, and which 
meets the opinions and requirements of his environment. The mask is the persona. 
The mask is not he same as individuality? (Frost, 2005).  
Jung?s explanation of personalities and personas is applicable to packaging. While 
contents of packages remained the same, the persona masks of the packaging changed 
often to compete with other products (Frost, 2005). Consumers began to be bombarded in 
the grocery store by packages that ?seemed to be shouting across the aisles at each other? 
(Frost, 2005). Hine thought ?that putting faces on packages at the beginning of the 1900s 
(e.g., Aunt Jemima) was part of a transition from judging people based on true 
personality to judging them based on persona? (Frost 2005). Hine believes that this gave 
people who felt lost in an early twentieth century society a way of interacting with 
packages without revealing too much of their self (Frost, 2005). 
The evolution of consumer?s interaction with a product (Figure 10) begins with 
consumer confidence. Once shoppers began to trust packaging and consumer confidence 
was prevalent, packaging began to target consumer emotions. For example, ?breakfast 
foods?were now marketed to make parents feel good when serving them to their 
children? (Frost, 2005).  Later, brand standardization became a concern. Packages needed 
to consistently communicate the brand?s personality everywhere that there was a 
consumer interaction.  

 

 
Figure 10. Evolution of Consumer Confidence 
Standardizations in Product Packaging 
Government laws and regulations have been enacted to ensure that consumers are 
aware of what a package contains. In the United States, the Fair Packaging and Labeling 
Act (FPLA) requires ?all consumer commodities to be labeled to disclose net contents, 
identity of the product, and name and place of business of the product?s manufacturer, 
packer, or distributor? (?Product Labeling,? 2009). Government laws call for the textile 
Industry to label all clothing items with care instructions and information regarding the 
type of fibers in the garment (?Product Labeling,? 2009).  The United States Government 
also regulates the appliance and electronic industries, making sure that they are in 
compliance with ?energy efficiency labeling requirements? (?Product Labeling,? 2009).  
 

 

The Universal Product Code 
 Norman Joseph Woodland and Bernard Silver invented the UPC (Universal 
Product Code) in 1949.  They patented ?the concept of a symbol and reader? (?History of 
the UPC Bar Code?).  In 1970, McKinsey & Company worked with the Uniform Grocery 
Product Code Council (UGPCC) to create the modern UPC bar code (?History of the 
UPC Bar Code?). George Laurer, who worked for IBM, came up with the design of the 
bar code (?History of the UPC Bar Code?). The UPC label is used for ?tracking, stocking, 
and pricing? (Dupuis & Silva, 2008, p.133 ). It can be scanned with infrared light that can 
decode the pattern of vertical bars. The first item to use the UPC system was a pack of 
Wrigley?s Juicy Fruit in 1974. The use of the UPC changed the shopping experience. It 
sped up the checkout, giving the store the ability to move more shoppers through the 
grocery store line, faster.  
Nutrition Labels 
In order to provide consumers with nutritional data, The Food and Drug 
Administration (FDA) has stringent requirements for food and drug labeling in the United 
States. In 1990, The Nutrition Labeling and Education Act (NLEA) was signed into law. 
This required food packaging to ?disclose the fat (saturated and unsaturated), cholesterol, 
sodium, sugar, fiber, protein and carbohydrate content in their products? (American Heart 
Association, 2009).  In 1993, the FDA and the USDA defined the format of the nutrition 
label. Most recently the FDA has required trans fat to be listed on the nutrition fact label 
(Figure 11). 

 

 
Figure 11. Nutrition Fact Label, (U.S. Food and Drug Administration, 2004) 
Challenges with Understanding Nutrition Fact Labels 
 Studies have been conducted to determine if people are able to understand the 
information on nutrition labels. In 2006, studies conducted by Vanderbilt University 
Medical Center were released that showed the difficulty that people have with reading 
nutrition fact labels (?Having Difficulty Reading Foods? Nutrition Labels,? 2006). 

 

?Vanderbilt University Medical Center surveyed 200 primary care patients from a wide 
socioeconomic range? (?Having Difficulty Reading Foods? Nutrition Labels,? 2006, para. 
2) to understand how well people are able to translate the information on nutrition labels. 
They gave each patient a Nutrition Label Survey (NLS) that included two parts (?Having 
Difficulty Reading Foods? Nutrition Labels,? 2006). The first part asked patients to 
?interpret food labels, such as determining carbohydrate or caloric content of an amount 
of food consumed. The other part asked patients to choose which of two foods had more 
or less of a certain nutrient?Over 40% (of the patients) had a chronic illness for which 
specific dietary intervention (was) important, and 23% reported being on a specific diet 
plan? (?Having Difficulty Reading Foods? Nutrition Labels,? 2006, para. 2 &3). The 
results showed that patients were not able to easily understand what the nutrition fact 
labels meant. ?Only 32% of patients could correctly calculate the amount of 
carbohydrates consumed in a 20-ounce bottle of soda that had 2.5 servings in the bottle. 
Only 60% of patients could calculate the number of carbohydrates consumed if they ate 
half a bagel, when the serving size was a whole bagel. Only 22% of patients could 
determine the amount of net carbohydrates in 2 slices of low-carb bread, and only 23% 
could determine the amount of net carbohydrates in a serving of low-carb spaghetti? 
(?Having Difficulty Reading Foods? Nutrition Labels, 2006,? para. 4). Mark Kantor, IFT 
(Institute of Food Technologies) member and Associate Professor in the Department of 
Nutrition and Food Science at the University of Maryland, explains, ?Many consumers 
admit to having trouble understanding the current Nutrition Facts label, or they don?t 
have time to read it? (Frederick, 2009, ?Nutrition Labels: Here, There, and Everywhere,? 
para.1). 

 

Solutions to Help Consumers Understand Nutrition Labels 
 Nutrition fact labeling has been confusing for many consumers. In response, some 
stores have tried to help customers make more healthy decisions by trying to simplify the 
nutrition fact label?s information. Supervalu has developed Nutrition IQ (Frederick, 
2009). Nutrition IQ is a system that uses color-coded tags to designate a food?s 
nutritional content (Frederick, 2009), for example, ?orange tags for high-fiber foods, 
green tabs for low sodium, and blue labels for foods with high calcium? (Frederick, 2009, 
?Nutrition Labels: Here, There, and Everywhere,? para.2). NuVal Nutritional Scoring 
System is a system that uses numbers from 1 to 100 to rank the nutritional value of a 
product (Frederick, 2009). ?The score is calculated using the Overall Nutritional Quality 
Index (ONQI), a patent-pending algorithm for measuring the nutritional quality of foods 
and beverages based on the influence they have on overall dietary goals? (Frederick, 
2009, ?Nutrition Labels: Here, There, and Everywhere,? para. 3). 
Summary of Chapter 
 Chapter 2 defines product packaging.  It explains the development of product 
packaging throughout history. Examining the meaning of product packaging helps 
establish user expectations of what product packaging does and can be. The 
standardizations represent user needs so pertinent that government has mandated them. 
Comprehension of definition and background provides a thorough foundation for new 
product development. 

 

CHAPTER 3:  SMART TECHNOLOGIES 
Overview 
 ??It?s possible to look at a can of peaches, for example, and learn precisely what 
quantities of nutrients it contains and how much of your recommended daily intake it 
provides. There might even be some suggestions about what else you ought to eat to 
achieve a healthy diet. A fresh peach may be juicier, but it does not begin to tell you so 
much? (Hine, 1995, p.21).  Chapter 3 examines smart technologies that can be 
incorporated into product packaging. The future of product packaging seems to be 
inevitably more interactive. These types of technologies can make that possible. 
Future Trends in Packaging Design
Packaging is continuing to change as new materials and manufacturing processes 
are developed. The role of packaging in the brand and the brand experience is also 
changing. Packaging is playing a bigger role in marketing. New technologies are 
emerging that can provide the user with meaningful information. More and more it seems 
as though when someone is shopping in a grocery store, they are less likely to have a 
prepared shopping list, and more likely to ?walk down the aisle, and let the packages 
speak to them? (Hine, 1995, p. 20).  New trends in product packaging may actually allow 
products to ?talk? to a user. Most smart technologies require a chip or a code to be placed 
in the packaging of a product. An electronic device then scans the chip or code. Most of 

 

the smart technologies that currently exist have been implemented to benefit the 
manufacturer or retailer during the inventory process.  
Available Technologies  
 There are a variety of different smart technologies available. Each technology 
functions a little differently. However, all the technologies are designed to give 
consumers more information than they are capable of seeing by looking only at the 
product packaging or advertisement. Most of the smart technologies require the user to 
scan a symbol with a handheld device, most often a cell phone, and decode its message. 
The variety of codes available requires companies to choose which code they will 
incorporate into their product or advertisement. This forces the user to choose an 
exclusive reading device or application that only allows them to read one type of code. 
The talking product system does not have a universal code.  
Checkout Smartshop 
Checkout Smartshop is a new way of providing the consumer with product 
information through packaging. Checkout Smartshop is an iPhone application that allows 
users to enter the UPC and ?get Amazon reviews, varied online and retail store prices 
along with locations and phone numbers of stores nearby? (Apptism.com, 2009, para. 3). 
Users can easily access product information from their phones so they can make more 
informed buyer decisions.  
 
 

 

Red Laser 
Occipital has released an application called Red Laser (Figure 12) that allows 
users to take a picture of a barcode with their cell phone (Redlaser.com, 2009). The 
picture of the barcode allows the user to ?check online prices for a DVD player, scan 
movie at the store and beam them to your TiVo, scan a book and check for reviews, (and) 
scan the milk and add it to your grocery list? (Redlaser.com, 2009, para.1). 
 
Figure 12. Redlaser UPC Scanner (Occipital, LLC, 2009) 
Quick Response Codes 
 Quick Response is a visual code that is used as a way to store information 
(Blackwell, 2008). The code is applied to a product, sign, billboard, or advertisement 
(Blackwell, 2008). A consumer can use his or her cell phone?s camera to read the code. 

 

The company?s website appears when the code is scanned (Blackwell, 2008). The code?s 
popularity began in Japan (Blackwell, 2008).  
ScanLife Codes 
 ScanLife uses a 2D barcode that can be placed on a package or advertisement 
(Biggs, 2008). ?The company?is dedicated to making 2D barcodes a mainstay of the 
modern experience? (Biggs, 2008, para. 5). The codes give the user access to more 
information about the product or service being advertised (Figure 13)  (Biggs, 2008). It 
can also locate products on a virtual map and then give directions of how to get there 
(Biggs, 2008).  
 
Figure 13. ScanLife Codes with Quick Response Codes (Biggs, 2008) 
RFID (Radio Frequency Identification) Technology 
 Radio frequency identification is ?a generic term that is used to describe a system 
that transmits the identity (in the form of a unique serial number) of an object or person 
wirelessly, using radio waves? (RFID Journal LLC, 2009, para.1).  ?RFID devices have 

 

three primary elements: a chip, an antenna, and a reader. A fourth important part of any 
RFID system is the database where information about tagged objects is stored? (?RFID 
Information,? 2009, para. 3).  
 
Figure 14. RFID Chip  
Radio Frequency Identification is part of a group called the Automatic 
Identification technologies. These technologies include ?bar codes, optical character 
readers and some biometric technologies, such as retinal scans? (RFID Journal LLC, 
2009, para.2). RFID chips have the capability of storing up to two kilobytes of 
information (RFID Journal LLC, 2009). Chips can contain Electronic Product Codes 
(EPCs) (RFID Journal LLC, 2009). Retailers or manufacturers often use EPCs to ?track 
authenticity and location of goods throughout the supply chain? (?RFID Information,? 
2009, para.4 ). The EPC is similar to a bar code except it is read using radio frequency 
instead of being optically scanned (?RFID Information,? 2009). EPCs connect to an 
internet database that can relate an unlimited amount of information to the EPC (?RFID 
Information,? 2009). The information is stored online. RFID chips can also contain 

 

biometric data that can identify an individual, like a photograph of a fingerprint, without 
revealing the individual?s name (?RFID Information,? 2009). Some RFID chips are not 
used to carry information (?RFID Information,? 2009). Instead they are placed on 
products to prevent shoplifting. These types of chips are part of Electronic Article 
Surveillance Systems (EAS) (?RFID Information,? 2009).  
 Each chip has an antenna (RFID Journal LLC, 2009). ?The chip and antenna (?) 
are referred to as a transponder, or tag? (RFID Journal LLC, 2009, para.6). The antenna is 
what transmits the information to the reader (RFID Journal LLC, 2009). The length of the 
antenna determines how far the chip can transmit information (RFID Journal LLC, 2009). 
The reader is ?a device that has one or more antennas that emit radio waves and receive 
signals back from the tag? (RFID Journal LLC, 2009, para. 5). The reader communicates 
with a computer system to translate the data. The reader does not have to ?see? the chip 
to be able to communicate with it (RFID Journal LLC, 2009). The reader can 
communicate with multiple RFID chips at one time (RFID Journal LLC, 2009). The 
reader communicates with a database, and the database carries information about the 
RFID chips (RFID Journal LLC, 2009).  
 The cost of RFID has limited its use. Prior to 1999, tags cost approximately a 
dollar (RFID Journal LLC, 2009). The Uniform Code Council and the European Article 
Number (EAN) worked with companies including Gillette, Proctor & Gamble, Kimberly-
Clark, Metro, Target, Tesco, Unilever, and Wal-Mart to bring the cost of RFID chips 
down (RFID Journal LLC, 2009). Their goal was to create a chip that would cost five 
cents, allowing for ?the potential of offering supply chain visibility ? the ability to know 

 

the precise location of any product anywhere in the supply chain at any time? (RFID 
Journal LLC, 2009, para. 9) Today, chips cost twenty to forty cents. IDTechEx predicts 
that the cost of chipless tags could be reduced to 0.1 cents (RFID Journal LLC, 2009). 
Chipless tags are tags that ?do not integrate a microchip?(they) use materials that reflect 
back a portion of the radio waves beamed at them. A computer takes a snapshot of the 
waves beamed back and uses it like a fingerprint to identify the object with the tag? 
(IDLogistics Inc., para. 10). IDTechEx projects that the number of RFID tags sold 
annually will increase from ?40 million in 2009 to 624 billion in 2019? (IDTechEx, 2009, 
para. 3). They predict that by 2019 the price of an individual tag will be one cent 
(IDTechEx, 2009).  
 The Auto-ID Center created the Electronic Product Codes (RFID Journal LLC, 
2009). It also developed the air interface protocol, the guideline for how RFID tags and 
the reader communicate (RFID Journal LLC, 2009).  The Auto-ID Center has given its 
technology to EPCglobal, a developing a network for companies to share real-time data 
(RFID Journal LLC, 2009). ?The potential efficiencies created by this visibility (network) 
are enormous. Companies would be able to reduce inventories while ensuring a product is 
always in the right place at the right time. And because no humans would have to scan 
the tags, labor costs and errors would also be greatly reduced? (RFID Journal LLC, 2009, 
para. 12). 
Wal-Mart and RFID 
 Wal-Mart was the first retailer to require suppliers to use RFID tags on product 
pallets (RFID Journal LLC, 2009). The introduction of RFID chips into Wal-Mart?s 

 

supply chain has increased the popularity of the tags (RFID Journal LLC, 2009). This has 
helped the industries ?chicken-and-egg-problem? (RFID Journal LLC, 2009, para. 16). 
The chicken-and-egg-problem (Figure 15) for RFID chips is the idea that the cost of 
chips will not come down unless more companies buy them, and more companies will 
buy them if the cost of the chips comes down (RFID Journal LLC, 2009).  Wal-Mart 
required suppliers to use tags that operated in the UHF spectrum (RFID Journal LLC, 
2009).  UHF systems are best for supply chain applications because products can be 
scanned on a pallet while moving through a dock (RFID Journal LLC, 2009).  
 
 
Figure 15. Chicken-and-Egg Problem 
Supply Chain and RFID 
 The supply chain can greatly benefit from RFID technology. Presently, products 
leave the manufacturer on a truck and are shipped to the distributor. Manufacturers do not 
have a way of knowing exactly when the distributor receives the product. Most of the 
time, the manufacturer has to call the distributor to find out if the product was received. 
Sometimes, the distributor has to call the manufacturer to find out where the product is in 

 

transit, especially if it is late to arrive. This process requires a lot of unproductive 
communication between the manufacturer and the distributor. There are also challenges 
when it comes to precise inventory in the manufacturer?s warehouse. A distributor may 
need a certain amount of products from a manufacturer?s warehouse. The manufacturer 
may have the amount of product that the distributor needs; however, a different 
distributor may already need the amount, or a portion of the amount. The distributor does 
not have a real-time way of knowing exactly what the manufacturer has and if it is 
accessible. 
 If RFID tags were introduced into the supply chain model (Figure 16), 
efficiencies of inventory and shipping would greatly increase. RFID tags would give 
manufactures and distributors a way to see exactly where products are when they are 
being shipped in real-time. ?It is this ability to share information about the location of 
products anywhere in the supply chain that makes RFID a potentially powerful 
technology? (RFID Journal LLC, 2009, para. 20). Store shelves could have readers on 
them that could keep track of how many products are on the shelf. When a product is 
almost out, it could wirelessly signal to a reader that would tell employees that a product 
needs to be restocked with an exact amount of items. The reader in the store could signal 
to the manufacturer when the stock was low and order a specific amount of product to be 
shipped on the next truck. This would save on labor costs for a store because the 
restocking process would become much more efficient.  

 

 
Figure 16. Supply Chain with RFID Technology vs. Traditional Supply Chain 
Product Authenticity and RFID 
 A growing concern with product purchasing and shipment is the authenticity of 
the product being received by the distributor, and ultimately by the consumer. For 
example, in 1982 it was discovered that a number of bottles of Tylenol had been laced 
with cyanide in the Chicago area. This scare led to safety sealed packaging (Meyers & 
Gerstman, 2005, p 216). Meyers et al. write, ?If we had had RFID technology back then, 
we would have known where the product was made, distributed and purchased. Johnson 
& Johnson (Tylenol?s manufacturer) would have quickly been able to recall the products 

 

that needed to be recalled, rather than having to take the time and expense to pull out all 
the products nationwide? (Meyers & Gerstman, 2005, p 216). 
 Counterfeiting is a growing concern for retailers. ?In China, pirating is prevalent, 
and people in garages make products that look like some of the brand names we?re all 
familiar with, such as Tylenol, Lego, Polo? (Meyers & Gerstman, 2005, p.217).  Product 
authenticity would allow retailers to guarantee to consumers that the product?s stated 
manufacturer had actually made the product.   
Consumer Advantages & Smart Packaging 
 Consumers could greatly benefit from smart packaging, or packaging that has 
RFID tag capabilities. It could revolutionize what we now think of when we think of 
going to the store and shopping. If every product had an identification tag they would 
create a sort of ?Internet of Things? (Treblicock, 2007, para. 6).  Just as readers would be 
able to keep track of inventory in warehouses and on store shelves, readers in a person?s 
home would be able to tell them if they were low on bread, if milk was expired, if the oil 
in the car needed changed, or if a light bulb needed replaced (Treblicock, 2007). ?In the 
future, the packaging will help you remember. As you open the bottle (a prescription 
bottle, in this case), a little chip in the cap will signal to you, possibly by changing color 
or even by talking to you, reminding you that you need to renew the prescription, instead 
of using what you have (if it is expired)? (Meyers & Gerstman, 2005, p218).  
 The United States government estimates that ?foodborne diseases cause 
approximately 76 million illnesses, 325,000 hospitalizations, and 5,000 deaths in the 
United States each year? (Center for Disease Control, 2009). Even though food has 

 

expiration dates on its packaging, it is not clear to consumers what happened to the food 
during the shipment process from the manufacturer to the retailer. Smart packaging may 
have censors that could alert retailers or consumers if food was exposed to temperatures 
that could spoil its contents, or censors that could even detect pathogens on the product 
(Meyers & Gerstman, 2005). 
 Smart packaging may also be able to accommodate different languages. 
Companies could communicate the brand to the consumer without text. Text could be 
kept on a database that the user could access in their language of preference when 
interacting with the product (Meyers & Gerstman, 2005). 
Marketing Benefits and Smart Packaging 
 Although seemingly intrusive to some, there is potential marketing strategy in 
smart packaging. If furniture and appliances in your home had readers in them, it may be 
possible for furniture to communicate with other furniture or appliances. As Meyers and 
Gerstman (2005) explain, 
  ?Your refrigerator communicates with your television, and your refrigerator 
says: ?This guy drinks 12 liters of Diet Coke a week and he?s about to run out.? 
And the television network says: ?Who wants to advertise to this guy? We have 
his favorite show, which he always watches, and we know he drinks a lot of Coke. 
Who wants to buy advertising time?? (p. 219). 
This type of communication could allow companies to market to specific individuals 
rather than to the masses. This would save companies money because commercials could 

 

be targeted to the individual instead of being targeted to the assumed demographic that 
would be watching that particular show at that particular time.  
Smart Packaging and Consumer Responsibility 
 Smart packaging may allow products to be tracked after they are thrown away. 
This idea may have interesting consequences. In the United States, people pay for waste 
management services. If it was possible to track exactly how much waste an individual 
was throwing away, it may allow for alternative accountability policy. You could be 
charged or taxed according to the amount you throw away or recycle. People may 
become more responsive to how wasteful they are if they can see a real value and 
compare that real value to a socio-economic norm.  
Consumer Disadvantages and Smart Packaging 
 Many consumers are concerned that smart packaging may be intrusive to their 
privacy. They fear that companies will have access to what products they are purchasing 
and how they are being used. RFID tags have been called ?spy chips?. The Auto-ID 
Center at Massachusetts Institute of Technology is aware of the growing concern. They 
are examining ways ?to disable the tags after the product is purchased? (Meyers & 
Gerstman, 2005, p. 225). However, completely disabling the tag may limit the potential 
user benefits of the tag.   
Consumers Against Supermarket Privacy Invasion and Numbering  
 Consumers Against Supermarket Privacy Invasion and Numbering 
(C.A.S.P.I.A.N.) was founded in 1999. They encourage consumers to oppose grocery 

 

store cards and RFID tags. They feel that a consumer should be informed whether or not 
a product has a smart packaging tag on it (Albrecht & McIntyre, 2007). The organization 
feels that the adoption of RFID tags ?will have chilling effects on consumers? ability to 
escape the oppressive surveillance of manufacturers, retailers, and marketers. 
?Government and law enforcement will be quick to use the technology to keep tabs on 
citizens? (Albrecht et al., 2007, ?RFID: Tracking Everything, Everywhere,? para. 13).  
Smart Packaging and The Shopping Experience 
 Smart packaging has the potential to change the shopping experience for 
consumers. The inclusion of digital devices that have the ability to communicate with 
consumers would create a new interactivity and connectivity for consumers. Packages 
could have the ability to sense the profile of the person walking through the aisle. The 
items could respond with sound or light. Items could signal their exact location in a store, 
saving consumers? time and wasted energy searching. Some stores are beginning to 
implement an interactive shopping experience that could be greatly enhanced by the 
incorporation of smart packaging. A test was conducted in Chicago to enhance 
consumers? shopping experiences (Meyers et al., 2005). Customers who had store cards 
were given scanners to carry with them during their shopping experience (Meyers et al., 
2005). The scanners gave the customers the ability to scan the UPCs of their groceries as 
they added them to their cart (Meyers et al., 2005). The scanner also contained digital 
coupons and a running total of the groceries in the cart (Meyers et al., 2005). When the 
shopper went to checkout, they simply hooked the scanner up to the self-checkout and 
were able to pay quickly (Meyers et. al., 2005, p.228). M.I.T.?s Professor Sarma has 

 

proposed that ?Shopping in the store of the future could theoretically mean going once a 
month, scanning items, and deciding which should be delivered, and when, to your home 
over the next several weeks? (Meyers & Gertsman, 2005, p. 228). 
Summary of Chapter 
 Understanding the capabilities of smart technology helps provide a guideline for 
what is possible in product packaging.  It is important to understand that there are a 
variety of smart technologies out there that could work in an interactive product system. 
The final outcome of this study demonstrates the use of RFID technology in a handheld 
device; however, new technologies may be developed that could serve the function more 
effectively. This study also reveals concerns that users may have with smart technologies 
and their privacy. These are all legitimate concerns to be taken into consideration in the 
design of the device.

 

CHAPTER 4:  HEALTH STATISTICS 
Overview 
 Health conditions continue to grow in the United States, and many of these health 
conditions are related to food consumption. The Center for Disease Control (2009) found 
that ?healthy eating is associated with reduced risk for many diseases, including the three 
leading causes of death:  heart disease, cancer, and stroke? (para. 1). The American 
Diabetes Association (2009) recognizes that ?Reading labels (nutrition fact labels) can 
help you make wise food choices? (para. 1). When Nutrition Fact labels were introduced, 
they were intended to provide consumers a way to understand what they were eating. 
They were introduced in the early 1990s, but the information that they were based on was 
from about three decades before the first nutrition fact labels were implemented. 
Nutrition fact labels confuse many consumers. The labels are dated, and the information 
is in need of a more intuitive labeling system. Chapter 4 looks at the ability of consumers 
to understand nutrition fact labeling. It also examines health condition statistics in the 
United States and looks at other health recommendation tools available.  
Do Consumers Understand Nutrition Fact Labels?
The effectiveness of the Nutrition Facts label is not clearly determined. Some 
studies show that many people do not understand how to use the nutrition fact label. A 

 

study released from Vanderbilt University Medical Center (2006) revealed the confusion 
in reading nutrition fact labels.  
??200 participants from a wide socioeconomic range, asking them to 
interpret food labels for nutrient content by the amount of food consumed. 
Another segment of the study asked participants to identify which foods 
had more or less of a certain nutrient. Going into the study, most 
participants (89%) felt confident they understood nutritional labels and 
could use them to make healthy choices. But the study's results, published 
in the American Journal of Preventive Medicine, showed otherwise. The 
study uncovered a significant gap in the general public's understanding of 
nutrition-label information. And while poor label comprehension did 
correlate with lower literacy and mathematic skills, even better-educated 
participants sometimes stumbled. Only 37% of participants could correctly 
calculate the total grams of carbohydrates in a 20-ounce bottle of soda that 
contained 2-1/2 servings. And when given the nutrition data on a whole 
bagel, only 60% could figure how many grams of carbohydrates they 
would consume if they ate only half a bagel. Many participants were 
confused by the complexity of the nutrition label, the researchers found, 
and were unable to find the facts they needed to answer researchers' 
questions. Some subjects confused the nutritional values given for the 
product they were eating with the recommended values for the whole day, 
or mistakenly incorporated the percentage of the product's values as part 
of a 2,000-calorie recommended daily allowance? (RDA) (para. 4-6). 

 

 Statistics show that consumers are looking at nutrition fact labels to make better 
decisions; however, some believe that ?Many people don?t have the reading and math 
skills to correctly interpret the nutrition labels on food packages? (Reinberg, 2006, para. 
1). Dr. David Katz, the director of the Prevention Research Center at Yale University, 
believes that ?We need an objective assessment of the overall nutritional quality of foods. 
We need that translated into simple, interpretable-at-a-glance symbols on the front of 
every packaged food? (Reinberg, 2006, para.18).  
Food Labeling to Advance Better Education for Life (FLABEL) 
 FLABEL is a group dedicated to researching the effectiveness of Nutrition Facts 
labels. Their objective is ?to understand how nutrition information on food labels affects 
dietary choices and consumer habits? (Flabel.org, 2009, ?About Flabel?). Their research 
is a three-year project that began in 2008 and will end in 2011 (Flabel.org, 2009). 
FLABEL is the first European organization to investigate the effectiveness of nutrition 
labels (Flabel.org, 2009). They plan on examining how many people actually read 
nutrition fact labels and what meaning is associated with these labels (Flabel.org, 2009). 
There is no research available now; however, this is one of the few organizations to 
conduct this type of extensive research related to the comprehension of nutrition fact 
labels (Flabel.org, 2009). 
Food Pyramid 
 Guidelines for food consumption began in the early twentieth century (United 
States Department of Agriculture (USDA), 2002). Food recommendations have changed 
over the decades to adjust to consumer perceptions, government agendas, and even war 

 

(USDA, 2002). Towards the beginning of the twentieth century, Wilbur Olin Atwater, 
Ph.D., wrote the ?Principles of Nutrition and Nutritive Value of Food? (Figure 17) 
(USDA, 2002). This was the first nutritional guideline (USDA, 2002). Atwater is 
responsible for the application of the calorie as a way of measuring food intake (?USDA 
Food Pyramid History, 2008). 
     
Figure 17. Early U.S. Nutrition Guides (U.S. Food and Drug Administration, 2009) 
 Early nutritional propaganda tried to encourage people to incorporate healthy food 
choices into their diets at an early age. It was understood that fats and sugars should be 
limited (USDA, 2002). 
 

 

 
Figure 18. 1894-1940 Nutritional Propaganda (U.S. Food and Drug Administration, 
2009) 
 Pre-World War II guides suggested that Americans eat more fruits and vegetables 
(USDA, 2002). Advertisements  (Figure 18) in newspapers demonstrated how people 
could make healthier food decisions (USDA, 2002). When World War II began, 
Americans were encouraged to grow their own food, eat less, and preserve their food 
(Figure 21) (USDA, 2002). Rationing influenced the USDA to divide food groups into 
seven categories milk, meat, fruit, vegetables, fats, sugars, and grains (Figure 19). After 
the war was over, the food groups were reduced into ?the Four Food Groups? (Figure 22) 
(Danielson, 2008) which included: meat, vegetables, dairy, and grains. Recommended 
caloric intake was substantially higher than today?s suggestions (Danielson, 2008). 
Sedentary men were advised to consume 2500 calories (Figure 20). Sedentary women 
were advised to consume 2100 calories (Danielson 2008). (USDA, 2002). In 2005, the 

 

Surgeon General?s suggestion for sedentary men is 2,000 to 2,400 calories per day 
depending on age, and for women 1,600 to 2,000 calories per day depending on age 
(USDA, 2002). People are realizing that it now takes fewer calories than were initially 
assumed for people to function. 
 
Figure 19. Early World War II Food Guide (U.S. Food and Drug Administration, 
2009) 
 
 


 
Figure 20. Early Recommended Daily Intake Guide (U.S. Food and Drug 
Administration, 2009) 
 
Figure 21. 1943-1955 Food Guide (U.S. Food and Drug Administration, 2009) 

 

 
Figure 22. 1956-1979 Food Guide (U.S. Food and Drug Administration, 2009) 
 The Hassle-Free Daily Food Guide (Figure 23) was used in the late 1970s and 
early 1980s (USDA, 2002). The Hassle-Free Daily Food Guide was similar to the Four 
Food Groups with the addition of the fats, sweets, and alcohol category (USDA, 2002). 
The incidences of heart disease and stroke were increasing (USDA, 2002).  

 

 
Figure 23. 1979-1984 Food Guide (U.S. Food and Drug Administration, 2009) 
 In the late 1980s and into the early 1990s, graphics (Figure 24) were attempted to 
best portray current nutritional guideline recommendations (Healthy-Eating-
Politics.com,? 2008). In 1992 the Food Guide Pyramid was released (Healthy-Eating-
Politics.com,? 2008).  

 

 
Figure 24. 1990 Dietary Guidelines (U.S. Food and Drug Administration, 2009) 
 The 1992 version of the Food Guide Pyramid (Figure 25) was inspired by 
Sweden?s food pyramid (Healthy-Eating-Politics.com, 2008). This food pyramid is 
believed to be graphically deceptive as it seems to emphasize the ?Bread, Cereal, Rice, & 
Pasta Group? as the most important group because of the area it takes up on the food 
pyramid (Healthy-Eating-Politics.com, 2008). 

 

 
Figure 25. Food Pyramid (Healthy-Eating-Politics.com, 2008) 
 In 2005, the U.S. government released a new Food Pyramid, called MyPyramid 
(Figure 26), after recognizing that ?more than two-thirds of Americans are overweight or 
obese? (?Government Releases New Food Pyramid?, 2007, para. 6). A person climbing 
stairs is incorporated into the food pyramid to stress the importance of exercise in 
addition to eating healthy (?Government Releases New Food Pyramid?, 2007). 
MyPyramid recommends that people consume, ?6 ounces of grains, 2.5 cups of 
vegetables, 2 cups of fruit, 3 cups of milk, 5.5 ounces of meat or beans, and only a small 
amount of fats and oils? (?Government Releases New Food Pyramid?, 2007, para, 4). 

 

 
Figure 26. MyPyramid (The New Food Pyramid, 2009) 
 Dietary guidelines have regularly changed over the past century. As new 
knowledge is obtained and consumer?s lifestyles change, nutritional guidelines have to 
adjust to accommodate these factors. A nutritional system that could support frequent 
changes and communicate those changes to consumers in a quick and effective method 
would be ideal. At this point there is no adaptive system to communicate nutritional and 
dietary guidelines. 
Population Averages  
 Americans have faced an increasing number of health conditions over the past 
few decades. The American diet has become increasingly nutrient deficient and 
substantially high in caloric content. The National Health and Nutrition Examination 
Survey released recommendations after surveying more than 15, 000 Americans about 

 

their health conditions, diet, and exercise (Hendrick, 2009). They concluded that obesity 
is increasing, and ?the prevalence of diabetes, hypertension, obesity, and cardiovascular 
disease has increased over the past 18 years? (Hendrick, 2009, para. 12). These 
conditions result in a low quality of life. They also concluded that ?More emphasis is 
needed on the importance of healthy lifestyle habits? (Hendrick, 2009, para.14).  
 Every five years the Surgeon General releases a report with dietary 
recommendations for Americans (Figure 27). The report ?is intended to be a primary 
source of dietary health information for policymakers, nutrition educators, and health 
providers? (?Dietary Guidelines for Americans?, 2005, p. 3). The document gives caloric 
suggestions to Americans, stating that a moderately active adult female may need 
anywhere from 1,600 to 2,200 calories depending on age, and a moderately active male 
may need anywhere from 2,000 to 2,400 depending on age (?Dietary Guidelines for 
Americans, 2005).  

 

 
Figure 27. U.S. Caloric Requirements (U.S. Department of Health and Human 
Services and the U.S. Department of Agriculture, 2005) 
 Even though the Surgeon General releases these suggestions, Americans are still 
struggling to understand how to make good choices. The following statistics will outline 
the growing health epidemics in the United States and show the relationship between 
diseases and food. 
 
 

 

Diabetes 
 The Center for Disease Control (2007) defines diabetes as ?a group of diseases 
marked by high levels of blood glucose resulting from defects in insulin production, 
insulin action, or both. Diabetes can lead to serious complications and premature death, 
but people with diabetes can take steps to control the disease and lower the risk of 
complications? (para. 1). In 2007, it was estimated that 23.6 million people in the United 
States have diabetes, and 5.7 million of those are undiagnosed (Figure 28) (National 
Diabetes Information Clearinghouse, 2007). 
 
Figure 28. Estimated Diabetes Prevalence (National Diabetes Information 
Clearinghouse, 2007) 
 According to the American Diabetes Association (2009), pre-diabetes can be 
treated. ?People with pre-diabetes can prevent the development of type 2 diabetes by 
making changes to their diet and increasing their level of physical activity? (American 

 

Diabetes Association, 2009, para. 1). The American Diabetes Association (2009) also 
recommends that those with diabetes or pre-diabetes should read nutrition fact labels and 
try to adhere to the following guidelines: 
 ?? Eat lots of vegetables and fruits. Try picking from the rainbow of colors 
available to maximize variety. Eat non-starchy vegetables such as spinach, 
carrots, broccoli or green beans with meals. 
 ? Choose whole grain foods over processed grain products. Try brown rice 
with your stir fry or whole wheat spaghetti with your favorite pasta sauce. 
 ? Include dried beans (like kidney or pinto beans) and lentils into your 
meals. 
 ? Include fish in your meals 2-3 times a week. 
 ? Choose lean meats like cuts of beef and pork that end in "loin" such as 
pork loin and sirloin. Remove the skin from chicken and turkey. 
 ? Choose non-fat dairy such as skim milk, non-fat yogurt and non-fat 
cheese. 
 ? Choose water and calorie-free "diet" drinks instead of regular soda, fruit 
punch, sweet tea and other sugar-sweetened drinks. 
 ? Choose liquid oils for cooking instead of solid fats that can be high in 
saturated and trans fats. Remember that fats are high in calories. If you're 
trying to lose weight, watch your portion sizes of added fats. 
 ? Cut back on high calorie snack foods and desserts like chips, cookies, 
cakes, and full-fat ice cream. 

 

? Eating too much of even healthful foods can lead to weight gain. Watch 
your portion sizes.? (para. 2). 
Cholesterol 
 The American Heart Association (2009) estimates that ??about 98.6 million 
adults in the United States have total blood cholesterol values of 200mg/dL and higher? 
(para. 1). Cholesterol levels over 220 are considered unhealthy (American Heart 
Association, 2009). The American Heart Association (2009) states that cholesterol levels 
can be managed by eating a healthy diet. They suggest eating twenty-five to thirty grams 
of fiber each day, limiting sodium intake, and eating ?a diet rich in vegetables and fruits, 
with whole grains, high-fiber foods, lean meats and poultry, fish at least twice a week, 
and fat-free or 1 percent fat dairy products? (American Heart Association, 2009, para.6).  
Heart Disease 
Heart disease is the number one cause of death in the United States (Centers for 
Disease Control, 2009). ?In 2003, approximately 37% of adults reported having two or 
more of six risk factors for heart disease and stroke (high blood pressure, high 
cholesterol, diabetes, current smoking, physical inactivity, and obesity)? (Figure 29) 
(Centers for Disease Control, 2009, para. 12).   

 

 
Figure 29. Millions of People with Diabetes Aged 35 Years and Older with Self-
Reported Cardiovascular Disease Conditions, United States, 1997-2007 (U.S. Center 
for Disease Control and Prevention, 2009) 
 The Center for Disease Control (2009) lists eight things people can do to prevent 
heart disease. One of those things is diet and nutrition. ?An overall healthy diet can help 
to lower blood pressure and cholesterol levels and prevent obesity, diabetes, heart 
disease, and stroke. This includes eating lots of fresh fruits and vegetables, lowering or 
cutting out added salt or sodium, and eating less saturated fat and cholesterol to lower 
these risks? (Center for Disease Control, 2009, para. 9).  
Food Allergies 
 Food allergies are increasingly more common among Americans (Figure 30). 
According to The Food Allergy and Anaphylaxis Network there are eight foods that are 
responsible for ninety percent of all food allergies (2009). Those foods are milk, eggs, 
peanuts, tree nuts, fish, shellfish, soy, and wheat (The Food Allergy and Anaphylaxis 
Network, 2009, para. 1).  Approximately 12 million people have food allergies in 

 

America (The Food Allergy and Anaphylaxis Network, 2009, para. 1). Some people may 
outgrow their food allergies; however, most people have to monitor the ingredients of the 
food they consume to prevent anaphylaxis (The Food Allergy and Anaphylaxis Network, 
2009).   
 
Figure 30. Percentage of Children with Reported Food Allergy (Center for Disease 
Control and Prevention, 2008) 
 
 
 
 

 

Dieting 
 Many Americans are confused by the constant and changing recommendations on 
what people should eat. Television, magazines, and other media outlets promote the latest 
and most effective diet of the week. Many people believe that the newest diet must be the 
solution they have been waiting for. In reality, diets may prove to be effective for a few 
weeks or months. People can lose weight, but when the individual goes off the diet they 
often gain back the weight that they lost and some additional weight. This is the result of 
losing a combination of muscle tissue and adipose tissue during the dieting process. 
Muscle tissue is responsible for a person?s metabolism. The more muscle tissue an 
individual has, the more they can eat. When the individual loses muscle tissue from 
dieting they are actually decreasing their metabolism. When they go off of the diet and 
return to their old eating habits, they have a lower metabolism than when they started the 
diet and their weight can increase to a level higher then when they first began the diet. A 
survey conducted by the American Institute for Cancer Research (2000) found that 
?Americans are seizing on ?quick-fix? strategies with little regard for how much food 
they actually consume. Americans?are concentrating too exclusively on cutting fat, or 
going on fad diets that restrict carbohydrates, sugar, or some other factor.? (American 
Institute for Cancer Research, 2000, para.3). Statistics have also revealed that ?On any 
given day, almost half of the women in the United States are on a diet, (and)?one in four 
men are on a diet? (American Institute for Cancer Research, 2000, para.1). While dieting 
may not be a long-term solution to a healthy weight, it is inevitable that people will 
continue to do it. A survey released in 2000 reveals that Americans spend over $50 
billion on dieting and diet-related products (?Statistics of Eating Disorders?).  

 

Cancer 
The National Cancer Institute (2009) says ?diet is an important part of cancer 
treatment? (para.1). There is no specific guideline for what an individual with cancer 
should or should not eat; however, it is suggested that people who have cancer try to eat 
food with essential nutrients, specifically ?vitamins, minerals, protein, carbohydrates, fat, 
and water? (National Cancer Institute, 2009, para.1).  The number of people with cancer 
in the United States has increased over the past fifty years  (Figure 31) (National Cancer 
Institute, 2009).  
 
Figure 31. Cancer Mortality in the U.S. (National Cancer Institute, 2009) 

 

Obesity 
 The Office of the Surgeon General stated that in 1999, ?61% of adults in the 
United States were overweight or obese? (U.S. Department of Health and Human 
Services).  Since 1995, the percentage of obese adults in each state has increased (Figure 
32) (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2009). ?For the first time in history, the 
majority of Americans (Figure 33) ? an estimated 55 percent ? are clinically overweight, 
while one of every four Americans is obese. This means that most Americans are now at 
increased risk of obesity-related diseases like cancer, coronary heart disease, stroke, 
diabetes, high blood pressure, gallbladder disease and osteoarthritis? (American Institute 
for Cancer Research, 2000,  para. 5).  
 
Figure 32. Percentage of Obesity in U.S. Adults (Centers for Disease Control and 
Prevention, 2009) 

 

 
Figure 33. U.S. Adult Obesity (Center for Disease Control and Prevention, 2006) 
The Mayo Clinic staff (2009) has made suggestions for the prevention of obesity. 
Those suggestions include:  
?Eat healthy meals and snacks. Focus on low-calorie, nutrient-dense foods, such 
as fruits, vegetables and whole grains. Avoid saturated fat and limit sweets and 
alcohol. Remember that no one food offers all the nutrients you need. Choose a 
variety of foods throughout the day. You can still enjoy small amounts of high-
fat, high-calorie foods as an infrequent treat. Just be sure to choose foods that 
promote a healthy weight and good health more often than you choose foods that 
don't? (para. 3). 
Food intake is the primary cause of obesity. Individuals can manage their weight 
by monitoring the nutritional content in the food they are eating. 
 

 

Summary of Chapter  
 Examining the increasing number of health conditions in the United States that 
have a substantial correlation with diet is important to understand the need for more 
simplistic and personalized nutritional information on product packaging.  Studying the 
government?s dietary guidelines over the past century displays the constant change in 
what is believed to be the appropriate amount of nutrients. By making these two points 
evident, it is easy to see why the compliance and comprehension of nutrition fact labeling 
is waning at best. People simply do not know what to eat, and they do they do not know 
how that information relates to the current nutrition fact label. There is a need for a 
meaningful interpretation of the seemingly confusing product labeling system. 

 

CHAPTER 5: GROCERY SHOPPING EXPERIENCE 
Overview 
 The grocery store and the way people shop has changed significantly since the 
first general store opened in the beginning of the twentieth century. Consumers now 
experience an exposure to thousands of competing product packages when they enter a 
grocery store. Chapter 5 will examine the change in the grocery shopping experience. It 
will look at the way grocery stores market to their customers. It will also illustrate the 
idea of overexposure to brands and how product packaging marketing may exist in the 
future.  
History of the Grocery Store
General stores were the first retail stores where people could buy what they 
needed. They were first opened in the beginning of the twentieth century. Early general 
stores included food, textiles, tools, and medicine. Most items were purchased in bulk 
and measured out for the customer. Farm equipment, appliances, and tools could be 
special ordered for customers. General stores functioned as a centralized location where 
people gathered to meet each other and socialize. General stores did not sell produce or 
fresh meat. Most of the items sold were preserved items. Shoppers had to go to separate 
vendors to buy fresh fruit, vegetables, and meat. During the Industrial Revolution, people 
began to move from rural areas into cities. People who were used to growing the food 

 

they needed now depended on others to grow it for them. In 1916, Piggly Wiggly (Figure 
34), the ?first true self-service grocery store, was founded in Memphis, Tennessee?by 
Clarence Saunders? (Piggly Wiggly, para. 1).  
 
Figure 34. First Self-Service Grocery Store (Piggly Wiggly) 
The self-service style grocery store allowed shoppers to collect all of the items they 
needed by themselves (Piggly Wiggly). They no longer had to wait on a general store 
attendant to weigh out the amount of coffee or flour that they needed. Self-service stores 
became known as ?groceterias? because they were similar to the cafeterias that were 
growing in popularity. In the 1920s, ?small regional chains, like Kroger, American 
Stores, and National Tea? became popular (Gwynn, para. 3). Most of them did not sell 
produce or meat (Gwynn). In California, some chain grocery stores began incorporating 
butchers, bakers, grocers, and produce vendors in the area so customers could get all of 
their items in one general location (Gwynn). In 1930, Michael Cullen opened the first 
supermarket in Queens, New York (Gwynn). The grocery store was named King Kullen 

 

Grocery Company. ?By 1936, there were 17 King Kullen supermarkets doing 
approximately $6,000,000 annually? (?Michael J. Cullen?, 2009, para. 4). ?Merchandise 
was sold out of packing cartons and little attention was paid to d?cor. The emphasis was 
on volume, with this one store projected to do the volume of up to one hundred 
conventional chain stores? (Gwynn, para. 6). By the 1950s, almost all grocery stores had 
transitioned to supermarkets (Gwynn). Over the past few decades, supermarkets have 
begun to split into two groups: discount stores and upscale grocery stores (Figure 35)  
(Gwynn). Natural food stores that specialize in organic foods have emerged, including 
Whole Foods and Trader Joes (Gwynn).  
 
Figure 35. Evolution of Grocery Stores 

 

Trends in Grocery Shopping 
 The way people shop has changed greatly in the past few years. Emerging 
discount stores like Wal-Mart, Costco, Sams, and Target are increasing in popularity. A 
recent CBS poll revealed ?six in ten Americans bought groceries at a low price mega-
store? (Alfano, 2005, para. 7). It is estimated that 10,000 supermarkets have shut down in 
the past twenty years  (Alfano, 2005). Consumers are demanding either discounted prices 
or a better shopping experience (Alfano, 2005). Whole Foods has grown rapidly. The 
founder, John Mackey, says that Whole Foods? goal is to ?reeducate people?(about) a 
whole art and culture around preparing food, enjoying food? (Alfano, 2005, para. 14). ?In 
a country where so many people are looking for such different things, the mass marketing 
is probably a thing of the past? (Alfano, 2005, para. 25). 
Ways of Targeting Consumers in the Grocery Store 
 As general stores have evolved into supermarkets, stores have had to come up 
with ways to connect with their shoppers. In the days of the general store, the owner of 
the store had a face-to-face connection with the shopper. They could advise the shopper 
on what to buy, tell them what is on sale, or what the store just got in. Shoppers had a 
personal connection with the person they were purchasing items from. Brands were kept 
behind the counter, and it was up to the sales clerk to suggest the product. Today, the 
shopping experience is very different. All brands are displayed for the shopper to see. It 
is rare that a shopper has a face-to-face connection with anyone in the grocery store. 
Grocery stores still have a need to market to their customers. Because the sales clerk-to-

 

customer interaction no longer exists, grocery stores have used other ways of marketing 
to connect with their customers.  
Coupons 
 Coupons have been a marketing approach to connect the consumer with a brand 
or product. They give consumers information about new items and can give a consumer a 
reason to try a product they wouldn?t normally purchase. In 1894, Asa Candler developed 
the first coupon (Tresbesch). He owned the Coca-Cola formula, and gave out coupons for 
a free sample of this new drink (Tresbesch). By the 1960s it was estimated that fifty 
percent of Americans were using coupons. By 2003, it was estimate that seventy-seven 
percent of American households were using coupons (Flash, 2008). Consumers have 
traditionally cut coupons from advertisements found in newspapers or magazines. 
Recently, grocery stores have begun to print coupons out with the customer?s receipt 
when a customer checks out. 
Store Cards 
 Grocery store discount cards have been another way of targeting customers. 
Discount cards keep an electronic profile of the customer, tracking what the person 
purchases and how often they shop in the store. This record of past purchases can be used 
to give customers coupons, or offer them discounts that non-card holders don?t receive. 
Some people object to discount cards, saying that they are an invasion of people?s 
privacy, and that a grocery store does not need to keep a record of every item a customer 
purchases. Either way, grocery store discount cards have had an increasing prevalence in 
the grocery shopping experience. 

 

Interactive Marketing Effectiveness 
 Marketing is most effective when it encourages consumer interaction. ?In just the 
past decade, the time devoted to advertisements in a typical hour of network television 
has grown from six minutes to nine minutes?the average American is now exposed to 
254 different commercial messages in a day? (Gladwell, 2002, p. 98). Consumers are 
exposed to an increasing number of advertisements. If an advertisement can get a 
consumer to interact it is more likely that the consumer will remember the brand. In the 
1960s, Howard Levanthal, a social psychologist, conducted studies to find out if he could 
convince college age students to get a tetanus shot. (Gladwell, 2002, p. 96) He gave half 
of the students a booklet that used graphic descriptions and fear tactics to persuade 
students to go to the Medical Clinic and get a tetanus shot (Gladwell, 2002). The other 
half of the group got a booklet that did not use graphic images or fear to convince 
students to get a tetanus shot (Gladwell, 2002). Neither booklet had a strong influence on 
the students to get a tetanus shot (Gladwell, 2002). Levanthal revised the booklets and 
incorporated a map that showed students exactly where the Medical Clinic was on the 
campus and what hours they were open (Gladwell, 2002). The map gave the students a 
tool to plan exactly when they could get a shot (Gladwell, 2002). Twenty eight percent of 
students who received the second version of the booklet got a shot, compared to three 
percent from the first versions (Gladwell, 2002, p. 96). When consumers get a chance to 
participate in advertisements, they feel like they are playing a part in the process.  If 
consumers had a more interactive connection with product packaging, they may be able 
to make better decisions. For example, if a package could not only advertise itself as 

 

being trans-fat free, but also tell you why reducing your trans-fat intake is important if 
you have high cholesterol, you might be more inclined to make a more healthful decision.  
The ?Immunity Factor?  
Malcom Gladwell (2002) explains that, ?When people are overwhelmed with 
information and develop immunity to traditional forms of communication, they turn 
instead for advice and information to the people in their lives whom they respect, admire, 
and trust? (p. 275). What he is referring to is Kevin Kelly?s ?fax effect? (Gladwell, 2002). 
The fax effect is the idea that in today?s economy people believe that the more 
abundantly you infiltrate people with an advertisement or information the more powerful 
it becomes (Gladwell, 2002). This is exactly opposite of how a traditional economy 
works. ?In the traditional economy, after all, value comes from scarcity. The 
conventional ?icons of wealth? ? diamonds, gold ? are precious because they are rare? 
(Gladwell, 2002, p. 272). Gladwell (2002) explains that the ?fax effect? is not effective 
(p. 272). When email first started in the mid-1990s he would receive a few emails each 
day (Gladwell, 2002). Gladwell explained that he would rush home and check his email 
and write lengthy, well thought-out responses to everyone who wrote to him (2002). 
?Now, of course, I get up in the morning and go to my computer and I have sixty-four 
messages, and the anticipation I once felt has been replaced by dread. ?I compose very, 
very short emails ? seldom more than two lines long ? and I often take two to three days 
to get back to people; and lots of email I don?t answer at all? (Gladwell, 2002, p. 274). 
What Gladwell  (2002) is describing is the immunity factor. The idea is that when a virus 
begins to spread it creates an epidemic, but eventually enough people are exposed to the 

 

virus, immunity is developed, and the virus disappears (Glawell, 2002). The Immunity 
Factor is relative to the grocery store because at one time people had to go into a general 
store and buy their goods. They had to have a face-to-face connection with an attendant 
who could answer their questions and advise them on what to buy. As supermarkets 
began to grow, people had less face-to-face connection. Consumers began to be 
bombarded by thousands of packages on grocery store shelves every time they went 
grocery shopping. Thomas Hine writes, ?No wonder a significant percentage of people 
who need to wear eyeglasses don?t wear them when they?re shopping, and some 
researchers have spoken of the trancelike state that pushing a cart through the 
environment induces? (Hine, 1995, p. 5). This package inundation has created an 
environment in which people can simply not sort through what they should buy and what 
they shouldn?t and what is a healthy choice and what isn?t. Consumers have become 
immune to the traditional communication of product packaging. 
Specifically Targeted Marketing in an Isolated Society 
Gladwell (2002) explained a more personal connection that people turn to when 
they are overwhelmed with information. This becomes a point of contention when 
examining current methods of product packaging. Product packaging can only be as 
personal as its passive message. However, rethinking the grocery shopping experience 
may lead to new approaches of personalization and connection. Incorporating smart 
technologies in the grocery experience may allow for product packaging to actively 
interact with the user, instead of the current passive interaction. Individualistic marketing 
has become more popular. Marketing tools like store cards have allowed shopping 

 

records to be kept on consumers. This allows companies to look at what an individual is 
purchasing and create a specific marketing strategy around their shopping habits. More 
types of consumer tracking systems may create more strategic and individualistic 
marketing. If smart technologies are incorporated into the grocery system, it is possible to 
not only keep track of what people buy and send them coupons accordingly, but to also 
program product packages to interact with consumers during their shopping experience. 
Items on the shelves could signal (through sound or color) to the consumer based on the 
consumer?s profile and their past shopping patterns. This type of marketing may prove 
more effective than current strategies because it is based on the individual?s preferences, 
not on a demographic or other group that a consumer may be lumped into.  
Summary of Chapter 
 Examining the grocery store shopping experience is pertinent in designing a 
device to be used in that environment. Looking at the history of grocery stores allows 
trends and themes to be identified. Understanding the new ways of targeting customers in 
grocery stores also helps predict future marketing strategies. Gladwell?s Immunity factor 
furthers the idea that a new way of product packaging is needed to achieve the same 
effectiveness of previous marketing tactics. 

 

CHAPTER 6: HOW PEOPLE SHOP 
Overview 
 For this study, user research was conducted to better understand the needs of 
shoppers. Grocery shoppers were observed while shopping. Shoppers received a booklet 
with images and questions for them to answer after their shopping experience. The 
booklets featured a series of images that were taken of them during their grocery 
shopping. The participants were asked to write how they were thinking and feeling at that 
particular time. At the bottom of each page, the participants were asked to mark how they 
felt (Figure 36).
 
Figure 36. User Research Questionnaire  
The booklets (Figure 37) were designed to be personal journals. Participants were 
asked to write their thoughts and feelings to evoke a more expressive response.  Thinking 
bubbles were inserted into the photographs to try to get the participants to write their own 
comic book like story.  The booklets attempted to take some of the seriousness out of the 
photographs and help the participants to see themselves and animate their own 
experience. The participants included Sarah, Johanna, Cathy, and Pat. 

 

 
Figure 37. Complete User Research Questionnaire 
Sarah 
 Sarah was asked the following questions: 
1. Name of Grocery Store: 
 Pick ?N Save 
2. Why were you going grocery shopping? [weekly trip, special occasion, forgot an 
ingredient, etc] 
 Special ocassion, cooking dinner at girlfriend?s house 
3. Were you shopping with a grocery list? 

 

 No (in my head) 
4. Did you use coupons? 
No 
5. Do you have any sort of diet restrictions [health condition, watching weight, etc]? 
Please explain. 
 No diet restrictions, but did want something somewhat healthy. 
6. Your name: 
 Sarah Strauss 
7. Your age: 
 26 
8. Your occupation: 
 Graphic Designer 
Sarah was then asked to look at the following pictures and write what she was thinking 
and feeling at the time. 
 
 
 
 

 

Question 1: 
 
Figure 38. Sarah 1 
Sarah marked frustrated/content. Sarah wrote, ?I was trying to get to the hairspray 
and realized I had just ran out that morning. I was a little surprised at all the boxes and 
cartons on the ground; the store I normally shop at doesn?t have this. I felt a bit like I was 
at Sam?s Club or something, so instead of looking, I cruised past it.? 

 

Question 2:
 
Figure 39. Sarah 2 
Sarah marked happy. Sarah wrote, ?I needed mustard and was walking through 
the aisle. The Newmans dressing caught my eye and I suddenly remembered that I am out 
of Rasberry vinagrette. So I just quickly grabbed it w/o even thinking twice about the 
price. I just know I needed it and used it.  
 
 
 

 

Question 3: 
 
Figure 40. Sarah 3 
 Sarah marked frustrated and wrote, ?Ah, the spice aisle. This makes me crazy. 
You think being in alphabetical order it would be easy but it?s not. I needed chili powder, 
but I wanted a small container, cheap. So there are a couple of brands, but there are SO 
MANY SPICES it takes FOREVER; as you can see I was concentrating hard.? 
 
 
 

 

Question 4: 
 
Figure 41. Sarah 4 
 Sarah marked frustrated/content, and wrote, ?Extra virgin olive oil. There are 
many types of them. But again size of the bottle mattered to me. I wanted a medium size 
but not pay an arm and a leg. I picked up one bottle but realized last minute ? up top there 
was Roundy?s brand (with nice new packing ? by the way) a bigger bottle AND $.20 
cheaper. So I picked that one instead.? 
 
 

 

Question 5: 
 
Figure 42. Sarah 5 
 Sarah marked content, and wrote, ?This is where I had the bottle for $3.89, 8oz. I 
was really ready to grab it, but decided to look up top. That?s where I saw the Roundy?s 
bottle. I didn?t recognize that bottle because Roundy?s has this new look, a re-
branding/all natural look that LOOKS more expensive than it is. I picked that one instead. 
8.5 oz. bottle for $3.69.? 
 
 

 

Question 6: 
 
Figure 43. Sarah 6 
 Sarah marked happy, and wrote, ?I was at the checkout. I saw the gum and 
realized I had none. I thought, well I am going to be having drinks tonight, so I should 
have some gum, for my breath later. I always get one of two brands same flavor; it?s a no 
brainer to choose.  
Johanna 
Johanna was observed next. The questions asked in the booklet were fine-tuned. The 
following questions were asked: 


1. Name of grocery store: 
Pick ?N Save 
2. Why were you going grocery shopping? [weekly trip, special occasion, forgot an 
ingredient, etc]: 
Weekly trip to the store 
3. Rank the most important things in a grocery store [1=most important]: 
1 price; 2 freshness; 3 familiarity; 4 service; 5 location 
4. Were you shopping with a grocery list? 
Yes 
5. Did you use a store club card? 
Yes 
6. Did you use coupons? 
Yes 
7. Are there any ingredients or foods that you try to avoid when grocery shopping? 
Why? Please explain: 
As a rule, no. Periodically, I will search for tofu and lactose free items for 
certain guests. 
8. Your Name: 
Johanna Ball 
9. Your Age: 
51 
10. Your Occupation: 
Marketing 

 

Johanna was then given the following pictures and asked to describe what she was doing 
and how she was feeling. 
Question 1: 
 
Figure 44. Johanna 1 
 Johanna marked frustrated, and wrote, ?I was checking the freshness of the 
apples, looking for firm, unbruised apples. I was a little frustrated because the quality was 
poor.? 
 
 

 

Question 2: 
 
Figure 45. Johanna 2 
 Johanna marked frustrated, and wrote, ?I was looking for a specific cut of meat 
and a larger quantity, which they did not have and would not cut for me. That means an 
extra trip to the store, which is an inconvenience.? 
 
 
 
 

 

Question 3: 
 
Figure 46. Johanna 3 
 Johanna marked content, and wrote, ?I was looking for certain frozen entrees 
which I use for lunch during the work week. I select based on calorie and fat grams, as 
well as price.? 
Question 4: 
 
Figure 47. Johanna 4 

 

 Johanna marked content, and wrote, ?I was checking the best offer because 
sometimes quantity deals can be misleading. This was 3, 12 packs versus 2, 24 packs for 
the same price?a little more for my money.? 
Cathy 
 Cathy was asked the following questions: 
1. Name of grocery store: 
Pick N Save. 
2. Why were you going grocery shopping? [weekly trip, special occasion, forgot an 
ingredient, etc]: 
Weekly trip. 
3. Rank the most important things in a grocery store [1=most important]: 
1 Location; 2 Price; 3 Freshness; 4 Familiarity; 5 Service 
4. Were you shopping with a grocery list? 
Yes 
5. Did you use a store club card? 
Yes 
6. Did you use coupons? 
Yes, picked up in store. 
7. Are there any ingredients or foods that you try to avoid when grocery shopping? 
Why? Please explain: 
Too much junk food, processed food to try to be more healthy. 
8. Your Name: 

 

Cathy 
9. Your Age: 
28 
10. Your Occupation: 
Marketing Manager 
Cathy was then given the following images and asked to write what she was doing 
in the images and how she was feeling.  
Question 1: 
 
Figure 48. Cathy 1 
 Cathy marked ?frustrated/content and wrote, ?I have no clue how to select an 
eggplant! I squeezed them to compare the texture. I didn?t want a bad eggplant to ruin the 

 

dish I was making, but since they all looked and felt similar, I felt that I had found one 
that would be okay. Maybe some sign or ?buying tip? would have helped! 
Question 2: 
 
Figure 49. Cathy 2 
 Cathy marked ?happy? and wrote, ?I realized I could save money purchasing the 
brand I normally buy anyway. I almost bought another brand on sale but I noticed the sell 
by date was soon approaching.? 
 
 

 

Question 3: 
 
Figure 50. Cathy 3 
 Cathy marked ?happy? and wrote, ? I was checking out the flavors and preparation 
steps, thinking, ?How easy would this be to make at work?? I remembered that I liked this 
brand when I last tried it, so I felt excited to try some more flavors.? 
 
 
 
 

 

Question 4: 
 
Figure 51. Cathy 4 
 Cathy marked ?content? and wrote, ?I wanted to make sure I had the correct box 
of Minute Rice that requires twenty minutes to make. I had previously tried the five 
minute rice and was disappointed. I was a little frustrated until I figured out that the 
packaging had been updated a bit for something that I typically buy over and over again.? 
 
 
 

 

Question 5: 
 
Figure 52. Cathy 5 
 Cathy marked ?happy? and wrote, ?Yes, I found pimento cheese to use in yummy 
hamburgers! I was happy since I couldn?t find it in another Pick N Save location.? 
 
 
 
 

 

Question 5: 
 
Figure 53. Cathy 6 
 Cathy marked ?content? and wrote, ?I was checking to make sure I had the right 
thing. I had bought these before but in a slightly different package.? 
Pat 
 Pat was asked the following questions: 
1. Name of grocery store: 
Kroger. 

 

11. Why were you going grocery shopping? [weekly trip, special occasion, forgot an 
ingredient, etc]: 
Weekly trip. 
12. Rank the most important things in a grocery store [1=most important]: 
1 Familiarity; 1 Freshness; 2 Price; 3 Location; 4 Service 
13. Were you shopping with a grocery list? 
Kinda. 
14. Did you use a store club card? 
Yes. 
15. Did you use coupons? 
Not that day. Cohort forgot them. 
16. Are there any ingredients or foods that you try to avoid when grocery shopping? 
Why? Please explain: 
Not really. 
17. Your Name: 
Patrick Philbin 
18. Your Age: 
24 
19. Your Occupation: 
Architect Grad Student 
Pat was then given the following questions and asked what he was thinking and 
feeling. 

 

Question 1: 
 
Figure 54. Pat 1 
Pat marked ?happy? and wrote, ?I was smelling the dish detergents because 
wanted to make sure it wouldn?t make my dishes smell weird.? 
 
 
 
 
 

 

Question 2: 
 
Figure 55. Pat 2 
Pat marked ?frustrated? and wrote, ?Nothing is worse than the awkward end of 
aisle collisions. Two people on a journey neither caring about the agenda of the other. 
Classic grocery store ? plus she was fat!? 
 
 
 
 

 

Question 3: 
 
Figure 56. Pat 3 
Pat marked ?frustrated/content? and wrote ?Where the hell are my bagels? Supply 
and demand is a bitch. Who always suffers? ?the consumer.? 
 
 
 
 
 

 

Question 4: 
 
Figure 57. Pat 4 
Pat marked ?content? and wrote, ?Wondering when white cranberries will come 
back into season. I guess I have to settle for regular cranberry.? 
 
 
 
 
 

 

Question 5: 
 
Figure 58. Pat 5 
Pat wrote, ?Searching for a pack of unbroken eggs. I wonder what they do with 
the broken containers?? 
 
 
 
 
 

 

Question 6: 
 
Figure 59. Pat 6 
Pat marked ?frustrated/content? and wrote, ?I was thinking why can?t they carry 
my OH?s cereal?damn you Kroger. No my back hurt?everyone loves the stress of 
shopping.? 
Interviews 
 Interviews were conducted with people who have specific diet restrictions to 
understand what people look at when they shop. One individual with food allergies was 
interviewed. She explained that when she shops she looks at the list of ingredients on 
food packaging, avoiding any wheat, dairy or animal products. The second interviewee 
has diabetes. He explained that he pays more attention to calories and grams of sugar 

 

when he looks at food packaging. He has a specific caloric goal that he has to maintain to 
keep his blood sugar level.  
 Both participants have diet restrictions; however, both require different types of 
information. One needed more information from the nutrition fact label; the other needed 
information from the ingredient list. These interviews revealed the need for a 
personalized interface incorporated into the scanning device. The interface would require 
an individual to enter information about themselves that the device could then translate 
into specific, meaningful information.  
Summary of Chapter 
 Observing the way people shop allowed for a more inclusive interface for the 
scanning device. In addition to personal health concerns, shoppers may also take into 
account the health concerns of their dinner guests. Shoppers may also have 
considerations like price or freshness that are important priorities.

 

CHAPTER 7:  DESIGN DEVELOPMENT 
Overview 
Chapter 7 focuses on the design development of two solutions that could exist in a 
smart product system in a grocery store. Both solutions demonstrate how a scanning 
device could provide a user with more meaningful information, allowing them to make 
more informed decisions. Both devices incorporate an interface design that gives 
individuals with health conditions information that they can use.  
Creating an Interface from User Research 
 The design of the interface grew from the findings in the user research. The user 
research was analyzed and for commonalities. The found commonality was when people 
go into the grocery store they are trying to make the ?best decisions? (Figure 60) for 
them. Each person has ?best decisions? that are unique to his or her individual needs. 
From the research, it was discovered that peoples? ?best decisions? include things like 
price, freshness, familiarity of the store, location of the store, preparation time of a 
product, and nutritional value. It was realized that peoples? ?best decisions? are not 
usually attained. These ?best decisions? quickly become frustrations of the shopping 
experience. Shoppers? frustrations include experiences like not being able to find 
something, not understanding how to choose between two items, not being able to tell 
which item is fresher, not being able to tell if the item they are purchasing is the same 

 

item they purchased in the past, not knowing what to make for a meal, and not knowing 
what item is healthiest for them. 
 
Figure 60. Shopper Desires vs. Shopper Frustrations 
 Shoppers? needs were identified from the user research and then interpreted into 
the core functions of the interface (Figure 61). The interface was specifically designed to 
help shoppers resolve their frustrations. Four scenarios were selected to demonstrate the 
capabilities of the interface. The four scenarios include a user with diabetes, a user on a 
budget, a user with a wheat allergy, and a user interacting with store marketing. 

 

 
Figure 61. User Research to Interface 
 The four scenarios were then exhibited in two different interface vehicles (Figure 
62). Both devices were designed to carry the same interface. The shared device is a 
grocery shopping cart with a computer screen integrated into the handle. The personal 
device is a hand-held portable device that a shopper would carry with him or her when he 
or she goes grocery shopping. 

 

 
Figure 62. Scenarios to Interface Vehicles 
Developing a Personal Interaction 
Both devices give the user a more informed experience, mimicking the face-to-
face relationship that shoppers had with store clerks in general stores (Figure 63). When 
people began to purchase items in grocery stores, they had direct contact with the store 
clerk. Shoppers had to ask the store clerk to get their items and package the items for 
them. The store clerk could tell the shopper what items were new in the store, what meals 
could be prepared with certain items, where items were located, what items were the 
freshest, etc. 

 

 
Figure 63.  Face-to-Face Personal Interaction 
 Modern day supermarkets do not allow for the face-to-face personal interaction 
that general stores once did. When shoppers enter a modern day supermarket, they are 
alone in their shopping experience. They no longer need to interact with a store associate 
to obtain the items they need (Figure 64). Shoppers have to rely on the printed 
information on the product?s package for the information that they used to obtain from 
the store clerk. 

 

 
Figure 64. Impersonal Grocery Store Interaction 
Modern supermarkets have supplemented the impersonal interaction with a 
variety of marketing channels including store cards and coupons (Figure 65). Store cards 
and coupons create a rapport between the shopper and the store that a clerk used to 
create. These marketing channels give the shopper a sense of belonging. 
 
Figure 65. Shopper-Marketing Channel Relationship 

 

Modern marketing channels and product packaging are failing to provide 
shoppers with information that they can relate to. Both interactive product devices 
designed for this study provide the shopper with a more personal experience. 
Interface Organization 
 The interface was organized according to users? needs (Figure 66). The interface 
allows the user to make a series of choices based on the user profile that he or she 
initially created for himself or herself. The user can quickly identify the information that 
is important to him or her when the product is scanned. Then, the interface suggests 
recommendations for the user in the instance that the user selects an item that conflicts 
with the user?s profile. The user can choose to deny the device?s recommendations or 
view the recommendations. If the user chooses to view the recommendations, a selection 
of alternative items appears on the screen. The user can then select the item that he or she 
prefers the most. The device automatically locates the item, displaying a map of the store 
with the item highlighted, so the user can find it.

 

Figure 66. Interface Scenario Flow Chart 

 

How the Interactive Product System Works  
 Both devices use a RFID scanner to transmit and receive a signal from a product 
(Figure 67). Both devices have Internet capabilities that allow the user to upload his or 
her profile. The user?s profile includes information about his or her height, weight, age, 
health conditions, diet, and budget. Each item in an interactive product system contains a 
chip that carries information about the product?s ingredients, nutrition facts, price of the 
product, and manufacturer.  
 
Figure 67. How the Device Works 
 

 

Interface Design 
 The interface design was developed from the user research. An adaptable 
interface was needed to fulfill all of the different needs that people with health conditions 
have. The interface features four tabs with icons on them, representing four main 
functions that are visible at all times.  
The four main functions include the ?Home? function, the ?Tools/Settings? 
function (Figure 68), the ?Checkout? function, and the ?Profile? function. The ?Home? 
function is the primary screen. When selected it displays whatever the user has 
programmed it to display through the ?Tools/Settings? function. The user can select 
functions like ?Grocery List?, ?Coupons?, ?Navigation?, etc. from the ?Tools/Settings? 
tab.  

 

 
Figure 68. Interface ?Tools/Settings? Tab 
The ?Checkout? tab allows the user to pay for the items in his or her grocery cart. 
When he or she selects that button, he or she is given the option of choosing form of 
payment. For example, the user may select the ?Checkout? tab and decide that he or she 
would like their total bill to be deducted from his or her Visa card or checking account. 
The screen would then ask the user to enter a password to verify that he or she agrees to 

 

the payment. The device would then wirelessly transmit that information to both the store 
and the bank or credit card company.  
The ?Profile? tab (Figure 69) allows the user to select his or her profile in the 
instance that multiple users share the same device. The ?Profile? tab also allows the user 
to edit information in his or her profile like height, weight, age, caloric goal, diet 
restrictions, etc. The ?Profile? tab also allows the user to track his or her progress and 
view previous shopping trips.  
 
Figure 69. Device Interface ?Hello Page? and ?Profile Page? 
 When the user first turns the device on, he or she is greeted with the ?Hello Page.? 
He or she is asked to enter a username and password. The user then goes to the ?Profile? 
tab where he or she can select the profile of the people he or she is shopping for. 
Selecting the ?New? icon allows the user to enter new profiles. When the user adds new 

 

profiles (Figure 70), he or she enters his or her name, birth date, gender, height, weight, 
diet, and health conditions. The device allows the user to select from a list of diets or 
enter specific ingredients that he or she is trying to avoid. The user can also input any 
health conditions that he or she has, and the device will make suggestions based on that 
particular condition.  
 
 
Figure 70. ?New Profile Page? and ?Select User Page? 
 Once the user has created a profile, he or she can select his or her profile (Figure 
69), or a group of profiles of those he or she is shopping for and choose to ?Track 
Progress?, ?Edit Profile?, or ?Shop.? ?Track Progress? allows the user to see how closely 
he or she is sticking to the diet they have entered into the device. 
 

 

Scenario One: Interface Design for User with Diabetes 
 A user with diabetes has specific needs when he or she is grocery shopping. He or 
she is looking at grams of sugar and the amount of calories in a given product. For 
example, if the user were shopping for juice, he or she may pick up a bottle of White 
Cranberry Peach juice. The scanning device would read that the user picked up a White 
Cranberry Peach juice (Figure 71), and it would display information about the product. In 
addition to displaying information about the product, the device would also warn the user 
that White Cranberry Peach juice is high in sugar per serving. It would ask the user if he 
or she would like recommendations, or the user can press ?OK? to ignore the warning. If 
the user chooses ?Recommend,? the display would show better options for an individual 
with diabetes. The interface would also tell the user why he or she should avoid products 
like the first one they selected. 
 


 
Figure 71. Interface Warning 

 

 
Figure 72. Alternative Item Recommendation Interface 
The alternative products are displayed so the best choice appears the largest 
(Figure 72) and the worst choice is the smallest. The user could then select an alternative. 
For example, if the user chooses the V8, the screen would then show information about 
the product and where it is located in the store (Figure 73). The screen would also display 
the location of the user to help navigate to the product.  

 

 
Figure 73. Item Mapping Interface 
Scenario Two: Interface Design for User with Food Allergies 
 People with food allergies have specific ingredients that they are trying to avoid. 
In the following the scenario, the individual has a wheat allergy. The user is looking for 
cereal and picks up a box of Cheerios. The device warns the user that the box of Cheerios 
contains wheat starch (Figure 74). The user would be able to choose to ignore the 
warning, or proceed with recommendations.  
 


 
Figure 74. Interface Warning   

 

 
Figure 75. Alternative Item Recommendation Interface 
 The interface would display alternative options for the user to choose from 
(Figure 75). The interface would also give the user information about why he or she 
should be avoiding that particular product. The user would then select an alternative item 
and be able to locate that product in the grocery store (Figure 76).  
 

 

 
Figure 76. Item Mapping Interface 
Scenario Three: Interface Design for User with a Budget 
 Individuals without health restrictions may have other constraints they are 
working with when they grocery shop, like a budget. An individual who is concerned 
about his or her budget would be able to program the device to help find the best value 
when shopping. If the user were planning his or her shopping trip at home, he or she 
could create the grocery list and have the opportunity to make cost-saving decisions 
before he or she even gets to the store.  The user may add cereal (Figure 77) to the 

 

grocery list. He or she could then select ?cereal,? and the device would display different 
cereals and their cost (Figure 78). The user could then select the best cereal based on his 
or her budget. Their grocery list would automatically update ?Cereal? to ?Fruit Loops 
Cereal.? 
 
Figure 77. Budgeting Interface Item Selection 

 

 
Figure 78. Budgeting Interface From List 
The user would also have the opportunity to make cost-savings decisions while 
shopping in the store. For example, if the user were shopping for Tylenol, he or she 
would pick up a box of Tylenol. The interface (Figure 79) would tell the user that there is 
a generic brand that can save him or her money. 

 

 
Figure 79. Budgeting Interface 
Scenario Four: Interface Design for Store Marketing 
 The device could also be used as a means of transporting information, specifically 
marketing, from the store to the shopper. When a shopper comes into the store, the store 
could signal to the user?s profile that he or she has new coupons. The coupons would 
display on the device (Figure 80) and would be applied to the purchase automatically 
without any paper transfers.  

 

 
Figure 80. Coupon Interface 
The store could also send signals to the device while the shopper is in the store 
based on the items they have picked up so far. For example, if the shopper picked up 
some chicken, the store might send a recipe for Chicken Alfredo along with a list of the 
other ingredients required to make that particular dish. If the shopper accepted the recipe, 
the ingredients would be automatically added to his or her list. The recipe would then be 
saved to the device. The user would be able to store all of the recipes he or she has 
collected on the scanning device (Figure 81). He or she could access them wirelessly later 
when he or she is ready to prepare them.  

 

 
Figure 81. Recipe Interface 
Sketch Development of Portable Device
The goal of the handheld portable device was to create a device with which a user 
could easily understand and interact. RFID scanners were examined. Initial sketches 
required a user to hold the device with two hands, similar to the way someone holds a 
portable video game (Figure 82).  

 

 
Figure 82. Initial Form Exploration 
 After conducting user research, it was realized that a device that could be held 
with one hand, leaving the other hand free to pick up products or hold the grocery basket, 
was more functional and easier to use for shoppers (Figure 83).  
 
 
Figure 83. Sketch Development for One-Handed Device 
 
 
 
 
 

 

Prototyping and Form Development of Portable Device 
 A three-dimensional yellow foam model (Figure 84) was created in the second 
phase of form development. The front of the model features a touch screen and two 
buttons. The two buttons allow the user to interact with the device without having to look 
down at the device. The ?Information Button? allows the shopper to get more information 
about an item. The ?Shopping Cart Button? allows the shopper to accept a scanned item 
with the understanding that he or she is agreeing to pay for that item. The back of the 
device (Figure 85) features a plastic screen where the RFID signal is transmitted and 
received. The form of the device is designed to mimic the conveyor belt in the grocery 
store that moves the groceries from the cart to the cashier and on to be bagged.  
 
 
Figure 84. Portable Device Foam Model 

 

 
Figure 85. Portable Device Foam Model Back View 
Computer Modeling of Portable Device 
 A Rhino Model (Figure 86) was created in the third phase of design development. 
The model was designed to be held in one hand. The two buttons were strategically 
placed in the middle of the device so the user can access them if he or she is left-handed 
or right-handed. The top button is the ?i? button. The ?i? stands for ?information.? When 
the ?i? button is pressed, the device scans the product, and information about the product 
is displayed. The button under the ?i? button is the ?Shopping Cart? Button. When the 
?Shopping Cart? button is pressed, the user accepts the scanned item as an item they want 
to purchase. The item is now added to his or her total shopping cart inventory. The device 
features a textured rubber area surrounding the two buttons (Figure 87), so the user can 
tell which side of the device they are holding. The top of the device features a light to 
indicate to the user what action the device is taking. The light turns green if input is 

 

understood by the device and accepted. It turns red if there is an error in scanning an 
item.  
 
Figure 86. Computer Model of Portable Device. 
 
Figure 87. Rendered Portable Device 

 

Sketch Development of In-Store Device 
 The development of an in-store device was designed to save users money and 
give the store control of the product. The store may also be more likely to update the 
device?s software. And making the device a part of the grocery cart allows one product to 
be shared among many people, saving resources and providing an additional service to 
shoppers. Incorporating a smart technology-scanning device into the grocery cart allows 
for an opportunity to redesign the shopping cart.  
 Initial sketch concepts (Figure 88) explored the incorporation of a screen that 
could give the user information during the shopping experience. The interactive product 
system would not require an individual to ?check out? their items at a register; rather, the 
shopper would be able to use his or her screen to tally up the items in the cart and deduct 
the total amount using an electronic payment option. This requires the shopper to bag 
items as they move through the store. Initial sketch concepts of the in-store device 
included areas for bags.  
 
Figure 88. Initial Sketch Development of In-Store Device 

 

Thumbnail ideation sketches (Figure 89) explored a form that was considerate of 
the user?s ergonomic necessities. The cart featured a form that angled the back wheel 
away from the user?s feet. 
 
Figure 89. Thumbnail Ideation Sketches 
The second phase of sketching (Figure 90) included a more refined form with a 
definitive aesthetic design. The concepts featured two baskets where groceries could be 
placed. They also featured a curved handle and an integrated computer screen. 
 
Figure 90. Refined In-Store Device Sketches 
 

 

Prototyping and Form Development of In-Store Device 
The second phase of design development for the in-store device was a full-scale 
sketch prototype (Figure 91). The prototype was constructed out of polyvinyl chloride 
plastic tubing, plywood, and foam core. The full-scale prototype revealed the need for 
negative space between the user and the back wheels. It also demonstrated the need for a 
tapered form so multiple carts could be nested together.  
 
 
Figure 91. Full-Scale Sketch Prototype of In-Store Device 
Computer Modeling of In-Store Device 
 The third phase of the design development process was creating a computer 
model. Two computer models were built. The first model (Figure 92) was proportionally 
unbalanced. It did not give the user enough room for a large amount of groceries. The 

 

wheels were all caster wheels, making the cart hard to maneuver. The cart did not feature 
an area for a small child to sit. The two baskets were equal in height. The identical height 
made the cart appear ?top heavy.? The cart featured two parallel frames that did not allow 
multiple carts to be stacked together. 
 
Figure 92. First Version Computer Model 
The second computer model (Figure 93) features a more proportionate aesthetic 
with a tapered form, allowing multiple carts to fit together. The cart features rectangular 
shopping bags specifically designed for the cart (Figure 94 & 95). Six bags can fit on the 
top basket; eight can fit on the bottom. The bags come in a variety of colors so the user 
can organize their groceries according to type. For example, the user can put all of the dry 
goods in the light gray bags and the produce in the green bags. The cart features two 

 

hooks below the child?s seat where additional folded shopping bags can be stored. The 
cart features an integrated computer screen where the interface is displayed to the user. 
On the backside of the screen, there is an RFID scanner. The bottom basket was designed 
to be taller than the top basket, giving the user space to put large items like paper 
products. The back wheels are larger than the front caster wheels. They are positioned on 
the outside of the cart?s frame, giving the cart more stability. The large wheels also allow 
the cart to be tilted back, similar to the way a dolly is tilted, for supplementary 
maneuverability. The handle is curved towards the user, allowing hand placement at a 
comfortable shoulder width position. 
 
Figure 93. Cart Computer Model Version 2 


 
Figure 94. Rendered Computer Model of Cart 
 
Figure 95. Rendered Computer Model of Cart in Grocery Store 

 

CHAPTER 8:  CONCLUSIONS 
Summary of Study 
 This study began with the identification of a need; health conditions are 
increasing, and nutritional information remains stagnant and incomprehensible. It showed 
the link between health conditions and food. It then examined the information product 
packaging displays. The study then addressed the growth of the incorporation of smart 
technologies into product packaging. It then summarized the trends in grocery shopping, 
and user research was conducted to see how people grocery shop. The research was 
followed by a user-centered interactive design approach and two variations of a scanning 
device that could communicate information to a user, providing them with a more 
meaningful grocery shopping experience.
Study Accomplishments 
 This approach was created to demonstrate how an interactive product system 
could benefit people, not just companies. The thesis outlines the kind of information 
people need to know when they shop, especially those with health conditions. This study 
explains that individual people need individualistic information that is specific to their 
needs instead of a collective average that is not relative to any one person. The study 
demonstrates how the information can be carried in two different product forms, a 
portable device and an in-store, shared device. 

 

Future Applications 
 A user-centered interactive product system may be able to be implemented 
differently in the future. As the cell phone continues to encompass more technologies, 
like the camera, video camera, voice recorder, and more, it may be possible to 
incorporate a smart technology scanner. An application could contain the interface, and 
the cell phone would become the reader for the system. 
 User-centered interactive product systems have further avenues of exploration in 
the process of designing more meaningful experiences for people. As technology 
develops, interactive product systems will become more available for use. These systems 
could greatly benefit people, giving them more information to make more knowledgeable 
decisions not only in the grocery store, but also in other instances. More user research 
should be conducted to determine what information people need and are not getting.  
 Additionally, protecting peoples? information is of great importance in future 
applications of an interactive product system. As systems move from paper to digital, 
peoples? security of information can become more vulnerable. Many people are 
concerned with the protection of the information now; they will likely become more 
concerned as more of their information is digitally accessed. More research needs to be 
conducted to prevent the loss of peoples? property and privacy. 

 

REFERENCES 
 
A Healthy Appetite for Innovation. (n.d.). Retrieved August 8, 2009, from 
http://www.ibm.com/ibm/ideasfromibm/us/smartplanet/topics/food/20081208/index.shtm
l 
abcNEWS.com. (2007, January 4). Sci-Fi Supermarket: High-Tech Innovations Coming 
to the Grocery Store. Retrieved August 27, 2009, from 
http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/NewYearNewYou/story?id=4081198 
Achooallergy.com. (2009). Food Allergy FAQ. Retrieved July 25, 2009, from Achoo 
Allergy & Air Products: http://www.achooallergy.com/food-allergy-faqs.asp 
Administration, U. F. (n.d.). Early Food Guides . Retrieved June 2009, 12, from 
http://www.nal.usda.gov/fnic/history/early.htm 
Alfano, S. (2005, November 20). No Ordinary Trip To The Market. Retrieved July 1, 
2009, from CBS News.com Sunday Morning: 
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/11/20/sunday/main1060317.shtml 
American Diabetes Association. (n.d.). How to Prevent or Delay Diabetes. Retrieved July 
25, 2009, from http://www.diabetes.org/diabetes-prevention/how-to-prevent-diabetes.jsp 
American Diabetes Association. (n.d.). Reading Food Labels. Retrieved July 24, 2009, 
from http://www.diabetes.org/food-nutrition-lifestyle/nutrition/meal-planning/reading-
food-labels.jsp 
American Heart Association. (n.d.). Cholesterol Statistics. Retrieved July 24, 2009, from 
http://www.americanheart.org/presenter.jhtml?identifier=4506 
American Institute for Cancer Research. (2000, March 24). New Survey Shows Americans 
Ignore Importance of Portion Size in Managing Weight. Retrieved July 25, 2009, from 
Charity Wire: http://www.charitywire.com/charity10/00201.html 
Berger, K. (2002). A Brief History of Packaging. Retrieved 2009, from 
http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/pdffiles/AE/AE20600.pdf  
Biggs, J. (2008, July 8). ScanLife: Barcode Scanning for the 21st Century and Beyond. 
Retrieved July 17, 2009, from TechCrunch: 
http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/07/08/scanlife-barcode-scanning-for-the-21st-century-
and-beyond/ 
Blackwell, G. (2008, August 7). Quick Response Codes Part III: Will North America 
Embrace the Technology? Retrieved July 3, 2009, from Smart Phone Today: 
http://www.smartphonetoday.com/articles/2008/8/2008-8-7-Quick-Response-Codes.html 

 

Bray, H. (2008, August 21). Groceries & Gadgets. Retrieved August 27, 2009, from 
Boston.com: 
http://www.boston.com/business/technology/articles/2008/08/21/groceries__gadgets/ 
Business.gov. (2009, May 29). Product Labeling. Retrieved June 2, 2009, from 
http://www.business.gov/business-law/advertising-law/labeling/>. 
Calorie Control Council. (n.d.). National Survey Reveals Major Increase in Number of 
People. Retrieved June 14, 2009, from http://www.caloriecontrol.org/pr072704.html 
Center for Disease Control and Prevention. (2006, April). Retrieved July 24, 2009, from 
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/products/pubs/pubd/hestats/obese03_04/obese_fig1.gif  
Center for Disease Control and Prevention. (2009, May 12). Diabetes Data & Trends. 
Retrieved 2009, from http://www.cdc.gov/diabetes/Statistics/cvd/fig1.htm  
Center for Disease Control and Prevention. (2008, December 2). Food Allergy Among 
U.S. Children: Trends in Prevalence and Hospitalizations. Retrieved 2009, from 
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/databriefs/db10.htm 
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2009, August 19). U.S. Obesity Trends. 
Retrieved 2009, from http://www.cdc.gov/obesity/data/trends.html  
Checkout SmartShop. (2009). Retrieved June 8, 2009, from Apptism: 
http://www.apptism.com/apps/checkout-smartshop 
Cummingsdesign. (n.d.). History of the UPC Bar Code. Retrieved June 8, 2009, from 
http://www.cummingsdesign.com/bar_code_history.htm 
Danielson, M. (2008, December 8). History of the Food Pyramid. Retrieved July 24, 
2009, from Associated Content Health & Wellness: 
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/1252640/history_of_the_food_pyramid.html?c
at=5 
Do You Know Where That's Been? (n.d.). Retrieved August 27, 2009, from Smart Food: 
http://www-07.ibm.com/innovation/au/smarterplanet/topics/food/index3.html 
Dupuis, J. a. (2008). Package Design Workbook: The Art and Science of Sucessful 
Packaging. Rockport. 
Dupuis, J., & Silva, S. (2008). Package Design Workbook: The Art and Science of 
Sucessful Packaging. Rockport. 
EconomoicExpert.com. (2009, June 2). Michael J. Cullen. Retrieved June 18, 2009, from 
http://www.economicexpert.com/a/Michael:J:Cullen.htm 
Flash. (2008, January 2008). History Of Grocery Coupons. Retrieved July 26, 2009, from 
Coupon Guide: http://www.grocerycouponguide.com/articles/history/ 

 

Food Labeling to Advance Better Education for Life. (2009, April 30). FLABEL News 
Overview. Retrieved June 20, 2009, from http://www.flabel.org/en/basic100032.html 
Fox, M. (2008, April 29). Many Americans Struggling in Life, Survey Finds. Retrieved 
August 8, 2009, from Reuters: 
http://www.reuters.com/article/healthNews/idUSN2937015820080429?feedType=RSS&
feedName=healthNews&sp=true 
Frederick, K. (2009). Nutrition Labels: Here, There, and Everywhere. Retrieved June 22, 
2009, from Foodtechnology Magazine: 
http://members.ift.org/IFT/Pubs/FoodTechnology/OnlineExclusive/nutritionlabels.htm 
Frost, R. (2005, October 3). Packaging Your Brand's Personality. Retrieved June 13, 
2009, from Brandhome: http://www.brandchannel.com/features_effect.asp?pf_id=283 
Gertsman, H. M. (2005). The Visionary Package: Using Packaging to Build Effective 
Brands. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. 
Gladwell, M. (2002). The Tipping Point. New York: Little, Brown and Company. 
Government Releases New Food Pyramid. (2009, September 13). (Pearson Education) 
Retrieved July 24, 2009, from Infoplease: http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0931190.html 
GS1 US. (2006). The Universal Product Code. Retrieved July 17, 2009, from 
http://www.uc-council.org/upc_background.html 
Gwynn, D. (2009). A Quick History of the Supermarket. Retrieved June 28, 2009, from 
Groceteria.com: http://www.groceteria.com/about/history.html 
Having Difficulty Reading Foods' Nutrition Labels? (2006, September 26). Retrieved 
June 27, 2009, from ABC of Fitness: http://www.abc-of-
fitness.com/news/200609/having-difficulty-reading-foods-nutrition-labels.asp 
Healthy-Eating-Politics.com. (2008). USDA Food Pyramid History. Retrieved July 24, 
2009, from Healthy Eating Politics: http://www.healthy-eating-politics.com/usda-food-
pyramid.html 
Hendrick, B. (2009, May 29). Healthy Living Still Eludes Americans. Retrieved July 25, 
2009, from WebMD Health News: http://www.webmd.com/healthy-
aging/news/20090529/healthy-living-still-eludes-americans 
Hine, T. (1995). The Total Package. New York: Little, Brown and Company. 
Ideal Fitness, Inc. (2009). The Average Amerian Woman Dieting & Weight Statistics. 
Retrieved July 25, 2009, from http://www.inch-aweigh.com/dietstats.htm 
IDEO.com. (1998). Shopping Cart Concept for IDEO. Retrieved August 27, 2009, from 
http://www.ideo.com/work/item/shopping-cart-concept/ 

 

IDLogistic Inc. (n.d.). Glossary of RFID. Retrieved June 10, 2009, from 
tp://www.idlogistic.com/glossary 
IDTechEx. (2009). The Biggest Opportunity for RFID. Retrieved June 13, 2009, from 
http://www.idtechex.com/research/reports/printed_and_chipless_rfid_forecasts_technolo
gies_and_players_2009_2019_000225.asp 
InSync Software Collaborates With IBM to Improve Food Safety. (2009, March 23). 
Retrieved August 27, 2009, from Reuters: 
http://www.reuters.com/article/pressRelease/idUS164071+23-Mar-2009+MW20090323 
Intelligentz Corporation. (2009). Cartmotion. Retrieved August 27, 2009, from 
Intelligentz: http://www.intelligentz.net/productsPage.php?page=cartmotion 
International Food Information Council. (n.d.). 2009 Food & Health Survey: Consumer 
Attitudes toward Food, Nutrition & Health. Retrieved August 8, 2009, from 
http://www.ific.org/research/foodandhealthsurvey.cfm 
MayoClinic.com. (2009, May 9). Prevention. Retrieved July 25, 2009, from 
http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/obesity/ds00314/dsection=prevention 
McIntyre, K. A. (2007). Pioneer of the Branding Phenomena. Retrieved 2009, from 
Spychips: http://www.spychips.com/about_us.html 
Mediacart. (2008, January 14). MediaCart, Microsoft and Wakefern Team Up to Deliver 
Next-Generation Digital Grocery Shopping and Ad Experience. Retrieved August 27, 
2009, from http://mediacart.com/pressrelease.html 
Meyers, H., & Gertsman, R. (2005). The Visionary Package: Using Packaging to Build 
Effective Brands. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. 
National Cancer Institute. (2009). Retrieved July 24, 2009, from 
http://cancercontrolplanet.cancer.gov/atlas/time.jsp?c=ACC&o=f&fc=time&chart=time&
ac=1&ss=US 
National Diabetes Information Clearinghouse. (2007). National Diabetes Statistics, 2007. 
Retrieved June 14, 2009, from http://diabetes.niddk.nih.gov/dm/pubs/statistics/#allages 
Occipital, LLC. (2009). What if Your iPhone Could Read Barcodes? Retrieved June 8, 
2009, from RedLaser: http://www.redlaser.com/ 
Paul S. Mead, L. S. (1999, September 15). Food-Related Illness and Death in the United 
States. Retrieved June 11, 2009, from Emerging Infectious Diseases: 
http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/eid/Vol5no5/mead.htm 
Piggly Wiggly. (n.d.). Where It Began. Retrieved June 18, 2009, from 
http://www.pigglywiggly.com/cgi-bin/customize?aboutus.html 

 

Reinberg, S. (2006, September). Nutrition Labels Confuse Consumers. Retrieved July 24, 
2009, from Misc. News: C.onsumer A.ffair: 
http://www.foodconsumer.org/777/8/Nutrition_Labels_Confuse_Consumers.shtml 
Retailer METRO Group Selects IBM Traceability Solution to Manage Product Expiration 
Dates, Get Promotional Items Onto Store Shelves Sooner. (2008, November 6). Retrieved 
August 9, 2009, from http://www-03.ibm.com/press/us/en/pressrelease/25917.wss 
RFID Information. (n.d.). Retrieved June 10, 2009, from Pinnacle Business Solutions: 
http://www.pinsol.com/rfid.htm 
RFID Journal LLC. (2009). What is RFID? Retrieved June 15, 2009, from 
http://www.foodconsumer.org/777/8/Nutrition_Labels_Confuse_Consumers.shtml 
Schlosser, E. (2002, August 29). Bad Meat. Retrieved June 6, 2009, from The Nation.: 
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20020916/schlosser 
Statistics of Eating Disorders. (n.d.). Retrieved July 25, 2009, from 
http://www.healthywithin.com/stats.htm 
Sterling, G. (2008, January 15). Microsoft and MediaCart Bring Ad Targeting To 
Grocery Store Shopping Carts. Retrieved August 27, 2009, from 
http://searchengineland.com/microsoft-and-mediacart-bring-ad-targeting-to-grocery-
store-shopping-cartsv-13134 
Swedberg, C. (2006, October 11). Grocery Retailers Test RFID-Enabled Shopping Carts. 
Retrieved August 27, 2009, from RFID Journal: 
http://www.rfidjournal.com/article/articleview/2720/>. 
The Food Allergy & Anaphylaxis Network. (n.d.). Common Food Allergens. Retrieved 
July 25, 2009, from http://www.foodallergy.org/allergens/index.html 
The Food Allergy & Anaphylaxis Network. (2009). Food Allergy Facts and Statistics. 
Retrieved June 14, 2009, from 
http://www.foodallergy.org/downloads/FoodAllergyFactsandStatistics.pdf 
The Hi-tech Shopping Trolley That Tells You Where To Find Things in a Supermarket. 
(2008, March 15). (Associated Newspapers Ltd) Retrieved August 27, 2009, from Mail 
Online: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-533793/The-hi-tech-shopping-trolley-
tells-things-supermarket.html 
The New Food Pyramid. (2009). Retrieved July 17, 2009, from 
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/nation/daily/graphics/diet_042005.gif 
Trebilcock, B. (2007, September 27). Tesco Rolls Out RFID Solution. Retrieved June 15, 
2009, from Modern Materials Handling: http://www.mmh.com/article/CA6482530.html 
Tresbesch, L. (2009). The History of Coupons. Retrieved July 26, 2009, from 
TicketPrinting.com: http://www.ticketprinting.com/Article-2006-01-10.aspx 

 

Tufts University. (2006, December). Making the Most of Nutrition Facts Labels. 
Retrieved July 24, 2009, from 
http://www.britannica.com/bps/additionalcontent/18/23314200/Making-the-Most-of-
Nutrition-Facts-Labels 
U.S. Department of Agriculture. (2002, September). Historical Food Guides Background 
and Development. Retrieved July 24, 2009, from Food and Nutrition Information Center: 
http://www.nal.usda.gov/fnic/history/ 
U.S. Department of Health & Human Services. (n.d.). Overweight and Obesity: At a 
Glance. Retrieved 2009, from 
http://www.surgeongeneral.gov/topics/obesity/calltoaction/fact_glance.html 
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and the U.S. Department of Agriculture. 
(2005). Dietary Guidelines for Americans. Retrieved July 25, 2009, from 
http://www.health.gov/dietaryguidelines/dga2005/document/pdf/DGA2005.pdf 
U.S. Food and Drug Administration. (2009). Early Food Guides. Retrieved June 12, 
2009, from http://www.nal.usda.gov/fnic/history/early.htm 
U.S. Food and Drug Administration. (2004, November). How to Understand and Use the 
Nutrition Facts Label. Retrieved July 16, 2009 , from 
http://www.fda.gov/Food/LabelingNutrition/ConsumerInformation/ucm078889.htm 
Walter Landor. (2004, August). Retrieved 2009, from Area of Design: 
http://www.areaofdesign.com/inthespotlight/landor.htm 
White, S. E. (n.d.). Consumers Confused By Health Info on Packages. Retrieved August 
8, 2009, from CalorieLab Counter News: 
http://calorielab.com/news/2009/08/02/nutrition-facts-food-labels-confusion/