Blind Box Culture and Its Appeal

What is it?

The first time I heard about what a blind box is, I was skeptical about the appeal. The first blind box I ever got was gifted to me and they came from the Sonny Angel series. I wondered what about these mostly naked babies with their butt cheeks out could be cute and desirable by the masses. Little did I know that this would be the beginning of my blind box figurine collection.

The idea of blind boxes originated in Japan around the 1980s where the earliest form is called fukubukuro, also known as “lucky bag” (Tse 2023). Blind boxes contain collectable figurines that come packaged in a box where the buyer does not know what character they will receive. The figurine designs are often centered around different themes. Within each theme, there are secret figurines that are rare and there are often less than 1% manufactured out of the entire series (Nguyen 2024). This article explores the psychology behind a consumer’s motive on buying blind boxes and how it makes them feel.  

Why do people buy blind boxes?

Places that sell blind boxes often have many options for customers to choose from. Due to the various selections possible, consumers are overwhelmed by curiosity and excitement surrounding which character they could pull. This is one of the biggest incentives for people to want to buy a blind box. When they open the box, they either feel happy for getting what they want or disappointment for getting a duplicate or feeling of wanting to buy another one to test their luck (Nguyen 2024). Consumers often want to obtain secret figurines or complete the series collection, which results in feeling the need to buy more. The act of purchasing a blind box draws upon the concept of sunk cost fallacy, where the amount already spent increases one’s commitment to continue buying until they achieve the desired result (Ronayne 2021). 

The sunk cost fallacy effect is attributed to high-stakes decisions which can be applied to various scenarios such as the decision on whether to buy a blind box or not. In a research conducted by Harvard on the sunk cost fallacy, participants were tested with eight different scenarios on their decision making. The finding from this was that “those with above average susceptibility scores (10 or higher) were almost three times as likely (36% vs 13%) to fall prey to the effect than those scoring below the average (9 or lower) when money was on the table” (Ronayne 2021). This relates to consumers’ motive for buying blind boxes as the fallacy manifests when they continue buying blind boxes because they’ve already invested money, rather than evaluating each new purchase decision independently. Specific triggers for the sunk cost fallacy in blind box purchases include, trying to complete a collection, attempting to get rare or secret figurines due to its scarcity nature, wanting to “make up for” previous disappointing pulls, and the desire to keep trying after getting duplicates.

The uncertainty factor in blind boxes is attributed to positive emotion, information gap theory, uncertainty resolution, and innate optimism theory (Zhang 2022). Due to uncertainty in what character the buyer could obtain, it enables a higher arousal state in turn increases physiological arousal. This causes people to experience their emotions more intensely and so positive uncertainty increases consumers’ positive feelings when making purchase decisions (Zhang 2022). In terms of information gap, this theory explores the idea of “an information gap between the known information of a person and the unknown and desired information” (Zhang 2022). As a result, increasing one’s desire to know the information. This ties into the uncertainty resolution theory where “human beings are born with an inherent desire to solve uncertainty” (Zhang 2022). Furthermore, the innate optimism theory enables people to subconsciously perceive themselves as lucky, estimating outcomes optimistically, which drives their motivation to desire or logically believe they need to buy a blind box. These all contribute to consumer’s action and motive behind their purchases as they perceive the product’s value as beneficial. 

Lastly, blind boxes build anticipation for its consumers. With the combination of uncertainty, dopamine is released when the consumer opens the box. The anticipation and surprise cause the release of dopamine, a neurotransmitter associated with pleasure and reward. Additionally, opening the blind box triggers the brain’s reward circuitry, particularly pathways in the mesolimbic system that generate feelings of reward and enjoyment. (Nguyen 2024). 

Expansion and Influence

Not only are consumers driven to buy blind boxes due to the overwhelming nature of displays when shopping in-person, but also the community it builds. Online, social media platforms feature communities dedicated to blind box culture. Collectors share unboxing videos, showcase their finds, and discuss their collections. These platforms allow consumers to connect with others who share their passion. As the popularity of blind boxes continues to rise, companies are finding new ways to innovate within this trend. Some examples are advent calendars or mystery items that come along with purchases, such as cosmetics. It is interesting to see how blind boxes have transformed today, and I’m excited to see how it continues to grow whether that is in popularity, influence, or in design concepts.

 

Sources cited

Nguyen, P. (2024, March 21). What psychological factors influence consumers’ decision about buying blind boxes? Cognitive NeuroEconomics @ UCSD. https://medium.com/cognitive-neuroeconomics/what-psychological-factors-influence-consumers-decision-about-buying-blind-boxes-a3440992273b

Ronayne, D., Sgroi, D., & Tuckwell, A. (2021, July 15). How susceptible are you to the sunk cost fallacy? Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2021/07/how-susceptible-are-you-to-the-sunk-cost-fallacy

Tse, A. (2023, March 24). Diving into blind box culture. Generasian. https://generasian.blog/2023/03/24/diving-into-blind-box-culture/

Zhang, Y., & Zhang, T. (2022). The effect of blind box product uncertainty on consumers’ purchase intention: The mediating role of perceived value and the moderating role of purchase intention. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 946527. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.946527

 

Your journey starts here! Let’s talk!

ThemeRex © 2026. All rights reserved.
  Timothy Durham was convicted of rape when a test showed his DNA genotype matched the DNA recovered from the crime scene. Eye witnesses testified that Durham was in a different state at the time of the incident, but he wasn’t exonerated from his 3000 year sentence until follow up DNA analysis showed that the preliminary forensic analysis used in the trial was misinterpreted (Thomas et al.). DNA testing serves an invaluable part in our criminal justice system, but it comes with complications and bias that can lead to wrongful convictions and misinformed juries.  

Background:

Forensic genetics aims to identify the origin of a biological sample. It can be traced back to Karl Landsteiner who discovered human ABO blood groups. With blood groups, suspects could be eliminated based on their blood type. For example, if a suspect had type A blood and there was type B blood left at the scene by the perpetrator, the investigators could rule out the suspect. Unfortunately, the reverse didn’t work. If the suspect and perpetrator both had the same blood type, it can’t be concluded that the suspect was guilty. Blood identifiers evolved into 8 distinct categories which improved the ability to eliminate suspects, but could only conclude that (if the system matched) it might be the perpetrator or this person might be related to the perpetrator (Jobling and Gill). The field evolved in the 1980s with the discovery of Minisatellites, lines of repetitive DNA that don’t encode proteins. Minisatellite patterns in DNA create what we know today as the DNA fingerprint, and it has a much higher accuracy rate than previous methods (Augustyn et al.). Around the same time, a breakthrough for victims of sexual assault was discovered. In the case of assault, bodily fluids of both the victim and the assaulter can get mixed. A process called differential lysis was created which could selectively increase the concentration of sperm in a fluid sample thereby allowing for accurate DNA testing (Jobling and Gill). Forensics evolved to use single-locus probe testing after several years because of its ease of interpretation. It looked at specific minisatellites that had high variability between subjects. This was the first DNA-based method to be used in a criminal investigation. Two murder homicides from several years apart were connected using DNA evidence. The evidence was then used to exonerate an innocent man, and the guilty party was found when he tried to evade mandatory DNA testing for all men in the small town. His guilt was then reinforced when the DNA profiles matched, and he gave a confession (Jobling and Gill). Finding DNA at a crime scene doesn’t guarantee that you’ll find a murderer. There are issues with non-pure samples and limited samples that make DNA work difficult, and accreditation of facilities and new techniques and take time (Jobling and Gill).  

Subjectivity of DNA Interpretation:

In a 2009 publication, the National Academy of Science discusses the possibility for subjective influence in lab based forensics. The interpretation bias happens in complex cases where, for example, there could be a mixture of DNA. A study published in 2011 looked specifically at this issue. A gang rape happened in Georgia, and the mixture in DNA from the case was used to prosecute one suspect after another suspect took a plea bargain to testify against him. With DNA mixtures, there are three possible conclusions: suspect excluded, suspect cannot be excluded, and inconclusive. If the suspect is excluded, it means that there’s little to no possibility that his DNA is part of the sample. If the suspect cannot be excluded, it means that there’s a possibility that his DNA is part of the sample. In the trial, the DNA examiners who knew the context of the case concluded that the suspect being prosecuted could not be excluded. The 2011 study gave the DNA evidence from this case and the DNA profiles of the suspects to 17 forensic examiners. These examiners had no context of the case, and they all worked independently. Of the 17, only 1 came to the same conclusion (suspect cannot be excluded) as the examiners who knew the context of the case. Twelve of the 17 concluded that the suspect who was prosecuted and convicted had no relation to the DNA found in the sample. Not only does this show that subjectivity occurs due to the context of the case, but the 17 examiners came up with different findings based on their past experiences meaning that not all DNA analysis is objective. Some organizations like the Scientific Working Group on DNA Analysis Methods say that quantitative statistical evidence should be presented with every categorical conclusion, but the US doesn’t require this (Dror and Hampikian).

False Positives:

There are two categories that cause wrongful identification in a DNA report: coincidental matches and false positives. Coincidental matches are DNA matches between two unrelated people. The probability of these matches is about 1 to 500,000 for white individuals and about 1 to 350,000 for black individuals. This small probability of coincidental matches makes people feel confident in DNA evidence. False positives, on the other hand, are matches between DNA and test DNA that result from issues in the forensics lab. There have been multiple cases of forensics labs accidentally switching victim and suspected rapist DNA which lead to convictions that were later overturned when the lab realized the error. There are also cases of misreading or misunderstanding a sample. In a case from 1993, a man was convicted of rape because someone interpreted a mixed sample of victim and perpetrator DNA as an individual sample. The conviction was again overturned. To prevent false convictions, retesting DNA is allowed, but it’s not an efficient solution. Many people are pushing for statistical information on the probability of false positives, so that the jurors can make accurate judgements based on DNA evidence (Thomas et al.).  

Conclusion:

DNA analysis is a useful tool for the criminal justice system, but subjectivity can be an issue in forensic testing. To combat wrongful convictions, there are organizations like The Innocence Project who use DNA testing to free the innocent, but reformed forensic testing standards should be put in place to prevent subjectivity and to ensure juries are correctly informed during trials. https://www.innocenceproject.org/    

Citation:

Augustyn , Adam, et al. “DNA Finerprinting.” Encyclopedia Britannica , 26 Apr. 2018, www.britannica.com/science/DNA-fingerprinting#ref153186. Dror, Itiel E., and Greg Hampikian. “Subjectivity and Bias in Forensic DNA Mixture Interpretation.” Science & Justice, vol. 51, no. 4, 2011, pp. 204–208., doi:10.1016/j.scijus.2011.08.004. Jobling, Mark A., and Peter Gill. “Encoded Evidence: DNA in Forensic Analysis.” Nature Reviews: Genetics, vol. 5, no. 10, Oct. 2004, pp. 739–751., doi:10.1038/nrg1455. Thompson, William C, et al. “How the Probability of a False Positive Affects the Value of DNA Evidence.” Journal of Forensic Sciences, vol. 48, no. 1, Jan. 2003, pp. 1–8., doi:10.1520/jfs2001171.