Technical copy helps functional products, hurts pleasure ones

The Mismatch That Kills Conversion

Scientific language works by signalling expertise and ingredient credibility. For a product where the customer's primary concern is "does this actually work?" - supplements, sunscreen, a serum - technical language directly addresses that concern. Clinical terminology, percentages, mechanism-of-action language: all of these build confidence.

But for indulgence products, the customer's primary concern is not efficacy - it is experience. Desire. Sensory pleasure. When you describe a chocolate bar with flavonoid percentages or a candle with combustion chemistry, you shift the customer's evaluative mode from emotional to analytical. And analytical evaluation is hostile to indulgence purchases.

Kronrod et al. found that hedonic products performed significantly better with sensory, evocative copy; utilitarian products performed better with assertive, functional copy. Mismatching the two degraded both trust and conversion.

The Practical Dividing Line

Ask: "Is my customer's primary question 'will this work?' or 'will I enjoy this?'"

If the answer is efficacy - write technical copy. Lead with active ingredients, concentrations, mechanisms. Support with clinical language and research references.

If the answer is enjoyment - write sensory copy. Describe how it smells, how it feels, what it evokes. Use metaphor, texture language, and imagery. Remove the science.

Audit Your Product Descriptions

Go through your product pages and identify the register of each description. Most stores have inconsistency: pleasure products described like supplements, functional products described like poetry. Fixing the mismatches is a copy edit with no design cost.

---

Research: Kronrod, Grinstein & Wathieu (2012), Journal of Consumer Research - hedonic consumption and assertive messaging.