Packaging can become a surprisingly consequential barrier with age. A bottle that is easy to twist, grip or reseal for one consumer may demand painful force, awkward hand movements or outside assistance from another. New research suggests that the features older consumers value most are not necessarily the most novel ones. Instead, basic operational and safety features appear to form the foundation of satisfaction.
A peer-reviewed study published in Scientific Reports on 2 October 2026 examined how older adults evaluate the usability of bottled food packaging. Xinyi Jian and Muhizam Mustafa used a mixed-methods design that moved from interviews, through expert review, to a Kano-model survey of 385 older adults. The researchers ultimately identified 27 usability attributes spanning five dimensions.
Why packaging usability matters more with age
Packaging is often treated as a marketing surface or a container, but it is also an interface. Consumers have to grip it, understand it, open it, control its contents and often close it again. Age-related changes in grip strength, joint mobility and sensory perception can make these apparently simple interactions more demanding.
Earlier work by the same researchers in Jiangxi Province highlighted practical difficulties such as tight closures, smooth surfaces, small tabs and unclear information. That qualitative work also pointed to a less obvious concern: packaging can affect autonomy and dignity when a person repeatedly needs help with an everyday product.
The new study went further by asking not only which features matter, but how different types of features influence satisfaction and dissatisfaction. That distinction is important because removing a frustration is not always equivalent to creating delight.
The study used interviews, expert review and a 385-person survey
The researchers used a sequential mixed-methods process. Semi-structured interviews were first used to identify common operational problems and generate candidate packaging attributes. A two-round Delphi consultation then asked experts to refine and validate the attribute system before it was taken into the larger consumer survey.
The final stage involved 385 older adults and used the Kano model, a framework designed to distinguish between different ways product attributes shape satisfaction. Rather than assuming that every improvement contributes to satisfaction in the same linear way, the model considers whether a feature is expected as a minimum requirement, whether better performance steadily increases satisfaction, or whether it functions as an unexpected bonus.
Across the research process, the authors identified 27 usability-related attributes. These were organised into five dimensions: functionality, reliability, usability, proficiency and creativity. This structure allowed the researchers to compare practical fundamentals with more innovative design elements.
Basic operation and safety behaved like necessities
The clearest pattern was an asymmetry between foundational and innovative features. Basic operational and safety-related attributes were mainly classified as Must-be or One-dimensional attributes.
In Kano terminology, a Must-be feature is something consumers largely take for granted when it works. Its presence may not produce unusually high satisfaction, but its absence can cause strong dissatisfaction. A One-dimensional feature behaves more conventionally: better performance tends to increase satisfaction while worse performance reduces it.
For packaging designers, that means an impressive visual concept or clever mechanism cannot necessarily compensate for a bottle that is difficult or unsafe to use. The practical baseline has to work first.
Novel features were more likely to delight than to prevent frustration
Innovation-related attributes showed a different pattern. They were primarily classified as Attractive attributes. These can increase satisfaction when present, but consumers do not necessarily become dissatisfied when they are absent because they are not treated as basic expectations.
This distinction offers a useful product-development lesson. If resources are limited, manufacturers may gain more by first removing barriers around operation, handling and safety than by adding novel features. Creative elements can then provide additional value once the fundamental interaction is dependable.
The findings also challenge a common tendency to discuss accessibility as a single checklist. Different attributes do different psychological work. Some prevent frustration, some create incremental gains and others provide pleasant surprises. Treating them as interchangeable can lead design teams to invest in visible innovation while overlooking less glamorous usability problems.
What the findings could mean for businesses
Population ageing makes the commercial relevance of accessible packaging increasingly difficult to ignore. Older consumers represent a large and growing market, but age-friendly design does not have to mean visibly age-labelled products. In fact, inclusive packaging can improve usability while retaining mainstream aesthetics and avoiding unnecessary stigma.
The study’s results suggest a practical hierarchy for product teams. First, identify features whose absence creates disproportionate dissatisfaction. Next, improve attributes where performance and satisfaction move together. Only then should optional innovations be treated as a substitute for the basics.
This approach could also improve how packaging concepts are tested. A single average satisfaction score may hide whether consumers regard a feature as essential or merely attractive. Segmenting attributes by their relationship with satisfaction can therefore provide more actionable information than ranking them only by popularity.
Important limitations remain
The study should not be interpreted as showing that the identified priorities apply identically to every older consumer or every packaging category. Preferences and physical capabilities vary substantially within older populations, and cultural, economic and product-specific factors can shape how packaging is used.
The Kano survey also captures reported evaluations rather than proving that redesigning a particular bottle will improve real-world opening performance, safety or purchasing behaviour. Controlled usability testing that measures opening force, task completion, errors and handling time would provide complementary evidence.
Finally, classification of an attribute is not necessarily permanent. As innovations become common, consumers can begin to expect them. A feature that delights users today may eventually become a basic requirement.
A more precise way to think about age-friendly design
The study’s main contribution is not simply a list of desirable packaging features. It is the finding that older consumers evaluate different kinds of usability improvements asymmetrically. Across 27 identified attributes and a 385-person survey, operational and safety fundamentals were more closely associated with avoiding dissatisfaction, while innovative features were more likely to add satisfaction when present.
For manufacturers, the message is straightforward: accessibility begins with reliable everyday use. Innovation can enhance the experience, but it should not distract from the basic physical interaction between a person and the package in their hands.
Source Information
Study: Prioritizing usability attributes in bottled food packaging for older consumers using the Kano model
Authors: Xinyi Jian and Muhizam Mustafa
Journal: Scientific Reports
Published: 2 October 2026
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-026-59163-w
