Perception study · Food and beverage

Cold, Wet, Right Now

467 people sorted 24 Coca-Cola images by one question: which of these make you want one right now? An ice-filled glass took 97.58% green. Santa took 78.54% red.

Every year, brands pour fortunes into nostalgia: the polar bears, the holiday trucks, the Santa who basically works for Coca-Cola. The theory is that feeling is what sells the drink. So we tested it.

The winners were not the beloved icons. They were photographs of cold, wet, in-motion liquid: condensation on glass, a bottle at the lips. People don’t crave the brand. They crave the drink. Which raises an uncomfortable question about how much of that nostalgia spend is buying affection no one asked to feel.

467Participants

24Images

4,683Dots placed

60%Sort threshold

Watch the walkthrough

A walkthrough of the boards: where 467 people put their dots, and why the icons lost to the liquid.

Figure 1 · Where the 4,683 dots landed

  • Green: makes me want a Coca-Cola
  • Red: least associated with wanting one
  • Quiet zones: low engagement, not rejection
Board 1 point map: aggregate green and red dot placement across twelve Coca-Cola images

Board 1. Green floods the bottles buried in ice and the two drinkers with their eyes closed. Red buries Santa, the logo on its own and the cans arranged as balloons.

Board 2 point map: aggregate green and red dot placement across twelve Coca-Cola images

Board 2. Green clusters on the ice-filled glass, the frosted bottle and two macro shots of condensation. Red goes to the folk-art bottle, the multiplying silhouettes and the 3D type sculpture.

Dot density is attention as well as verdict. The polar bear on Board 1 drew a crowd, and the crowd was red. The bottles in ice beside it drew the same crowd in green.

Quick answer

People crave the drink, not the brand. 467 participants sorted 24 Coca-Cola images against one question, which of these make you want a Coke right now, and placed 4,683 dots. Every image that cleared the 60% threshold as a craving trigger shows physical evidence of cold: an ice-filled glass at 97.58% green, bottles buried in shattered ice at 96.47%, a can surface covered in condensation at 84.47%. Every image that failed substitutes brand for drink: the can-balloon flat lay at 97.20% red, the logo-only lockup at 96.67%, the CGI polar bears at 81.57%, the illustrated Santa at 78.54%. Mascots, campaigns, illustration and graphic design do not qualify. The single best predictor of a green dot was condensation, ice or frost in the frame. The craving is triggered by perception, not persuasion.

How the study worked

Two boards, twelve images each: product photography, campaign stills, illustration, mascots and graphic design, mixed together with no grouping and no order. 467 people got green dots and red dots and one instruction. Green on the images that make you want a Coca-Cola. Red on the images that do not.

They placed 4,683 dots, 2,331 on Board 1 and 2,352 on Board 2. The point maps above are the raw result before any sorting. The two boards carried different image sets under the same prompt, so the pattern had to appear twice, independently, to count. It did, and the two boards produced structurally identical findings.

At the platform’s 60% threshold the 24 images fall into three groups. Ten cleared the bar as craving triggers, twelve crossed it as craving killers, and two split the room. See the full report for every score. What follows is what each group has in common.

The one variable that decided everything

Line the 24 images up by the share of their dots that came back green and one property sorts them: whether the frame contains visible evidence of cold. Condensation. Ice. Frost. Splashing water. Every image in the resonance array has it. No image in the resistance array has it.

Not the logo. Not a person. Not the contour bottle. The Coca-Cola mark appears on the winners and on the losers. People appear in both. What the winners have that the losers lack is the physical language of a cold drink, rendered close enough to touch.

Figure 1 · Every image, ranked

All 24 images placed on one axis by the share of their own dots that were green Ten green dots sit between 64% and 98%. Twelve red dots sit between 2% and 39%. Two grey dots sit alone in the middle at 40% and 52%. 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 60% GREEN: CRAVING TRIGGER 60% RED: CRAVING KILLER Ice-filled glass, 97.58% Can balloons, 2.80% green Two illustrated ads, alone in the middle SHARE OF EACH IMAGE’S OWN DOTS THAT WERE GREEN
Each dot is one image, placed by the share of its own dots that were green. Nothing lands between 52% and 64%. The room did not spread its opinion across a range. It sorted into a cold pile and a brand pile, with two illustrated ads in between.

Principal finding

Participants don’t want to see Coca-Cola’s brand. They want to see Coca-Cola’s drink. Every image that shows cold liquid in contact with a person, or surrounded by ice, scores as a craving trigger. Every image that substitutes storytelling, characters or graphic design for that sensory reality scores as a craving killer. The craving is triggered by perception, not persuasion.

What won: cold, wet and happening now

Ten images cleared the 60% threshold. They share a specific sensory grammar: cold made visible, liquid in motion, and the act of drinking in photographic detail. The two highest scores in the study, 97.58% and 96.47%, are product-only shots with no person, no setting and no narrative. Just ice, condensation and frost in extreme close-up.

The second trigger is the drinker. Both drinking images show a solitary person with eyes closed, and the expression is physical relief, not lifestyle. Participants are responding to the vicarious sensation of drinking, not to social proof of someone enjoying a Coke.

The condensation shot on Board 2 is the most telling result in the array. It shows red metal and water drops, the logo barely legible, and it scored 84.47% green. The texture of cold water on metal triggers craving on its own, without product recognition.

Resonance

The ice-filled glass

Amber liquid, ice and a sweating branded glass in close-up

98% green · 12.29% of the board’s dots

Resonance

The bottles in ice

Two glass bottles buried in shattered ice

96% green · 12.14% of the board’s dots

Resonance

The frosted bottle

A glass bottle outdoors in snow, ice crystals on the cap

96% green · 12.50% of the board’s dots

Resonance

The cap in the splash

A bottle cap hit by water, macro

89% green · 6.74% of the board’s dots

Resonance

The beaded label

Extreme macro of a can label under condensation

86% green · 6.29% of the board’s dots

Resonance

Condensation alone

Red metal and water drops, the logo barely legible

84% green · 6.85% of the board’s dots

Resonance

The drinker, eyes closed

A woman drinking from the bottle, eyes shut

84% green · 11.97% of the board’s dots

Resonance

The AHHH glass

Bold type over an ice-filled glass, campaign frame intact

69% green · 7.55% of the board’s dots

Resonance

The cans in the splash

Cans tumbling through water on a dark ground

68% green · 6.13% of the board’s dots

Resonance

The second drinker

A young man drinking, eyes closed, logo overlaid

64% green · 8.71% of the board’s dots

The campaign frame costs points

The AHHH image is the outlier that proves the rule. The glass is sweating and the ice is real, but a typographic treatment sits between the viewer and the drink. It scored 68.75%, the weakest result in the array. The concept is good. It costs resonance because it mediates perception through an advertising frame.

What lost: everything the brand has ever done

Twelve images crossed the 60% resistance threshold, three of them above 93%. They span Coca-Cola’s greatest hits: the Santa, the bears, the personalized bottles, the graphic experiments, the logo on its own. What unites them is an absence. None shows cold liquid in a way that feels physically real and immediate.

Mascots displace the product

The illustrated Santa, the photorealistic bear and the hugging CGI bears all fail decisively. This is not a marginal result. When a polar bear is holding the Coke, the attention goes to the bear. The craving circuit is short-circuited by narrative.

Resistance

The hugging bears

Two CGI polar bears, one holding the bottle

82% red · 9.23% of the board’s dots

Resistance

The Santa

The illustrated Christmas Santa with a Coke

79% red · 9.40% of the board’s dots

Resistance

The AI bear

A photorealistic polar bear in a branded scarf

69% red · 7.68% of the board’s dots

Design is the wrong register

The flat, abstract and illustrated images are among the most ambitious executions on the boards, and they drew the most unanimous rejection in the study. They fail not because they are bad design but because they are design. Design signals brand, and the participant wants to feel drink.

Resistance

The logo alone

The mark on concentric red circles, nothing else

97% red · 9.01% of the board’s dots

Resistance

The type sculpture

An abstract 3D letterform built into a bottle shape

94% red · 9.99% of the board’s dots

Resistance

The silhouettes

White bottle outlines multiplying across red

92% red · 8.93% of the board’s dots

Resistance

The folk-art bottle

A dense red illustration with decorative motifs

90% red · 10.50% of the board’s dots

Concepts have to be decoded first

The You / Me bottles, the vintage “with Coke” ad and the can balloons are advertising ideas. An idea has to be processed before it can be felt, and the craving trigger is pre-cognitive. Anything that asks the brain to think first loses the window.

Resistance

The can balloons

Cans arranged as a bouquet, flat lay on red

97% red · 9.18% of the board’s dots

Resistance

The vintage print ad

A retro “with Coke” layout, bottle in the corner

83% red · 7.94% of the board’s dots

Resistance

The You / Me bottles

The personalized-label campaign, two bottles on red

65% red · 3.56% of the board’s dots

Abundance cancels craving

The grid of caps and the diagonal grid of cans show the actual product and still fail. Overhead perspective and hard, even light turn a drink into inventory. You cannot be thirsty looking at a warehouse.

Resistance

The bottle caps

A flat-lay pattern of caps, top down on white

68% red · 3.32% of the board’s dots

Resistance

The can grid

A diagonal flat lay of cans, red on red

61% red · 4.85% of the board’s dots

Resistance pattern

Anything that mediates between the participant and the physical reality of the drink kills the craving. Characters mediate through narrative. Illustration mediates through style. Campaigns mediate through ideas. Flat lay mediates through aesthetic distance. All of them are legitimate brand tools. None of them make you want a Coke right now.

The whole study in two images

The cleanest pair on the boards is two product-only shots. Neither has a person, a setting or a line of copy. Both are art-directed. One is sweating. The other is arranged.

Ice-filled glass with amber Coke and a sweating logo, close up
97.58% green The ice-filled glass Ice, condensation, amber liquid. The highest score in the study, on 12.29% of its board’s dots.
Coke cans arranged as a balloon bouquet, flat lay on red
97.20% red The can balloons Cans arranged as a bouquet on flat red. The highest rejection in the study, on 9.18% of its board’s dots.

Same product, same red, same absence of people. One is a cold drink. The other is a clever idea about cans, and the room could not have been clearer about which one it wanted.

The two images that split the room

Two images on Board 2 landed below the threshold in both directions, and each contains one craving element inside a resistance frame. The black-and-white woman drinking through a straw has a person drinking, which the winners reward, but the bottle-shaped mask, the monochrome and the tagline reframe a sensation as a claim. The soda-fountain waitress is the closest split in the dataset. Real glasses of Coke pull toward green. The nostalgic illustration pulls toward red. The room divided almost exactly in half.

Contested

The soda-fountain waitress

A vintage illustration presenting real glasses of Coke

52% split · 51.58% green, 48.42% red

Contested

The bottle-shaped drinker

Black-and-white photo masked into a bottle, tagline on red

40% split · 40.24% green, 59.76% red

The neutrals confirm the model. Sensory content creates pull. Artistic or conceptual framing creates drag. An image that does both lands in the middle.

What to do with this

The decision logic translates directly into art direction, for a soft drink and for any category where the brief is immediate desire rather than long-term affection.

Do

  • Lead with cold. Condensation on a can or bottle is the most reliable trigger in the dataset. Frost, ice and splashing water do the same work.
  • Shoot the real thing. Photographic realism beat illustration, CGI and graphic design every time. The closer the image sits to what the product looks like, the better it scored.
  • Show the act of drinking. A solitary drinker, eyes closed, in physical relief. Not a lifestyle moment, not a social scene.
  • Let the liquid show. The amber-brown of the drink appears in nearly every winner and vanishes from the losers.
  • Get close. Macro and extreme close-up beat wide shots. Distance kills craving.

Don’t

  • Don’t send the mascots. Santa and the bears build brand love. They scored 78.54% and 81.57% red on craving.
  • Don’t shoot flat lay. Overhead perspective removes the three-dimensional, light-catching wetness that makes cold appetizing. The can balloons went 97.20% red.
  • Don’t lead with the logo. The logo-only lockup scored 96.67% red. The mark alone generates active rejection of craving.
  • Don’t make people decode. If the concept takes more than half a second, the window has closed. The You / Me bottles are a clever campaign. They do not make people want a Coke.
  • Don’t go nostalgic. Craving is present tense. Retro reads as past: 82.70% red for the vintage print ad.

Craving is not brand love

This study measured one outcome: the desire to drink a Coke right now. It did not measure affinity, purchase intent or loyalty. The bears, the Santa and the graphic campaigns are almost certainly doing their job on those metrics. They just should not be the creative answer when the brief is to make someone thirsty.

Methodology and confidence

467 completions across two boards, 4,683 dot placements over 24 images, 2,331 on Board 1 and 2,352 on Board 2, classified at the platform’s 60% threshold. Several images cleared 90% to 97%, which is near-unanimous consensus rather than a marginal pattern, and the core finding replicates on both boards independently with partially overlapping image sets.

No demographic breakdown was collected, so it is unknown whether age, culture or relationship to the brand modulates the result. The seasonal imagery may perform differently with audiences for whom Santa and the bears are deeply nostalgic. The photorealistic AI bear at 69.27% red is one data point about uncanny mascots, not a verdict on AI imagery.

Frequently asked questions

What was tested in the Coca-Cola craving study?

24 Coca-Cola images across two boards of twelve: product photography, campaign stills, mascots, illustration and graphic design. 467 participants placed green dots on the images that made them want a Coke right now and red dots on the images that did not, 4,683 dots in total, sorted at a 60% threshold.

What does “97.58% green” actually mean?

It means 97.58% of the dots placed on that image were green rather than red. The figure is a share of that image’s own crowd, not a share of all 467 participants. The report also gives each image’s share of its board’s attention: the ice-filled glass drew 12.29% of every dot placed on Board 2, and almost all of them were green.

How do I read the point maps?

Each green mark is one participant saying this image makes me want a Coca-Cola. Each red mark is the opposite. Dense clusters are attention; the colour of the cluster is the verdict. A big red crowd, like the one on the polar bear, means the image stopped people and then lost them.

Does this mean Santa and the polar bears are bad advertising?

No. The study measured one narrow response, the visual trigger of a craving in the moment of viewing. It did not measure recall, affinity or purchase intent, and the mascots are almost certainly strong on those. The finding is that they do not make people thirsty, so they should not be the creative answer when that is the brief.

What does this mean for my brand?

If the goal is immediate desire, at point of sale, in a fridge cling or a social ad, lead with the sensory reality of the product and keep the brand secondary. If the goal is warmth and recognition, the storytelling assets still earn their keep. Run the two briefs as two tests, because the same 467 people will sort the same images differently.

Pillar: What 500 People See (Proof). Target keyword: what makes people crave a Coke. Search intent: “beverage advertising that drives craving,” “do the Coca-Cola polar bears work,” “soft drink product photography.”