Effects of food package information and sensory characteristics on the perception of healthiness and the acceptability of enriched biscuits

Abstract The aim of the present work was to study the interaction between sensory and non-sensory characteristics that influence the overall acceptance and perceived healthiness of enriched biscuits and/or biscuits with reduced levels of high energy components. Three different scenarios (blind, informed and expected conditions) were analyzed. The participants mapped the samples in Napping® tests and rated the overall acceptance and perceived healthiness of ten biscuits. The results showed that overall acceptance was higher for almost all the biscuits in the blind test, whereas seeing only the package showed a trend towards higher perceived healthiness, suggesting that non-sensory factors could influence the first buy and sensory characteristics could determine loyalty and repeat consumption of certain enriched or reduced-calorie biscuits. It was observed that participants were not willing to compromise sensory characteristics for health even though they considered that some food components were beneficial for the diet. The study showed how sensory and non-sensory cues interact to build consumer perception and how, depending on the particular product, parameters like the brand, category, familiarity with the product, familiarity with the claim or sensory profile can influence product assessment (acceptance and healthiness perception) in different ways.

[1]  A. Cardello.  Consumer concerns and expectations about novel food processing technologies: effects on product liking☆ , 2003, Appetite.

[2]  Monique M. Raats,et al.  The effects of information on sensory ratings and preferences: The importance of attitudes , 1991 .

[3]  Rosires Deliza,et al.  An investigation using the repertory grid and focus group methods of the package features affecting consumer perception of fuit juice , 1999 .

[4]  M. Vidigal,et al.  Effect of a health claim on consumer acceptance of exotic Brazilian fruit juices: Açaí (Euterpe oleracea Mart.), Camu-camu (Myrciaria dubia), Cajá (Spondias lutea L.) and Umbu (Spondias tuberosa Arruda) , 2011 .

[5]  Ellen van Kleef,et al.  Functional foods: health claim-food product compatibility and the impact of health claim framing on consumer evaluation , 2005, Appetite.

[6]  P. Williams,et al.  Consumer understanding and use of health claims for foods. , 2005, Nutrition reviews.

[7]  Charles Francis,et al.  Food system orientation and quality perception among consumers and producers of organic food in Hedmark County, Norway , 2001 .

[8]  Michael Siegrist,et al.  Consumers’ willingness to buy functional foods. The influence of carrier, benefit and trust , 2008, Appetite.

[9]  Paula Varela,et al.  Exploring consumer product profiling techniques and their linkage to a quantitative descriptive analysis. , 2010 .

[10]  Paolo Masi,et al.  The effect of expectations generated by brand name on the acceptability of dried semolina pasta , 2004 .

[11]  P. Varela,et al.  Influence of nutritional knowledge on the use and interpretation of Spanish nutritional food labels. , 2012, Journal of food science.

[12]  Gastón Ares,et al.  Identifying ideal products using three different consumer profiling methodologies. Comparison with external preference mapping , 2011 .

[13]  René Lion,et al.  Front-of-pack nutrition labelling: Testing effectiveness of different nutrition labelling formats front-of-pack in four European countries , 2008, Appetite.

[14]  Wim Verbeke,et al.  Consumer-driven definition of traditional food products and innovation in traditional foods. A qualitative cross-cultural study , 2009, Appetite.

[15]  A. Cardello.  Consumer expectations and their role in food acceptance , 1994 .

[16]  Jérôme Pagès,et al.  Comparison of three sensory methods for use with the Napping® procedure: Case of ten wines from Loire valley , 2008 .

[17]  J. Steenkamp,et al.  Assessing Measurement Invariance in Cross-National Consumer Research , 1998 .

[18]  Guillermo Hough,et al.  Overcoming the issues in the sensory description of hot served food with a complex texture. Application of QDA®, flash profiling and projective mapping using panels with different degrees of training , 2011 .

[19]  K. Grunert.  Current issues in the understanding of consumer food choice , 2002 .

[20]  Azucena Gracia,et al.  Does nutrition information on food products lead to healthier food choices , 2010 .

[21]  J. Wardle,et al.  Development of a Measure of the Motives Underlying the Selection of Food: the Food Choice Questionnaire , 1995, Appetite.

[22]  Joachim Scholderer,et al.  Perceived fit of different combinations of carriers and functional ingredients and its effect on purchase intention , 2011 .

[23]  K. Grunert.  European consumers' acceptance of functional foods , 2010, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.

[24]  Gastón Ares,et al.  Influence of gender, age and motives underlying food choice on perceived healthiness and willingness to try functional foods , 2007, Appetite.

[25]  S. Aikman,et al.  Food attitudes, eating behavior, and the information underlying food attitudes , 2006, Appetite.

[26]  Gastón Ares,et al.  Influence of brand information on consumers’ expectations and liking of powdered drinks in central location tests , 2010 .

[27]  A. Salvador,et al.  How information about fibre (traditional and resistant starch) influences consumer acceptance of muffins , 2008 .

[28]  Jérôme Pagès,et al.  Collection and analysis of perceived product inter-distances using multiple factor analysis: Application to the study of 10 white wines from the Loire Valley , 2005 .

[29]  Klaus G Grunert,et al.  The perceived healthiness of functional foods A conjoint study of Danish, Finnish and American consumers' perception of functional foods , 2003, Appetite.

[30]  S. Jaeger.  Non-sensory factors in sensory science research , 2006 .

[31]  Gastón Ares,et al.  Influence of three non-sensory factors on consumer choice of functional yogurts over regular ones , 2010 .

[32]  Wim Verbeke,et al.  Consumer acceptance of functional foods: socio-demographic, cognitive and attitudinal determinants , 2005 .

[33]  L C Gilbert.  The Functional Food Trend: What’s Next And What Americans Think About Eggs , 2000, Journal of the American College of Nutrition.

[34]  Svein Ottar Olsen,et al.  The effect of health benefit information on consumers health value, attitudes and intentions , 2009, Appetite.

[35]  Rosires Deliza,et al.  THE GENERATION OF SENSORY EXPECTATION BY EXTERNAL CUES AND ITS EFFECT ON SENSORY PERCEPTION AND HEDONIC RATINGS: A REVIEW , 1996 .

[36]  Simone Mueller,et al.  The relative influence of packaging, labelling, branding and sensory attributes on liking and purchase intent: Consumers differ in their responsiveness , 2010 .

[37]  R. Shepherd,et al.  Nutrition communication: consumer perceptions and predicting intentions , 2011, Proceedings of the Nutrition Society.

[38]  Einar Risvik,et al.  Projective mapping: A tool for sensory analysis and consumer research , 1994 .

[39]  Hans Verhagen,et al.  Status of nutrition and health claims in Europe. , 2010, Archives of biochemistry and biophysics.

[40]  W. Verbeke,et al.  Association between traditional food consumption and motives for food choice in six European countries , 2009, Appetite.

[41]  Harry T. Lawless,et al.  Perceptual mapping of apples and cheeses using projective mapping and sorting. , 2010 .

[42]  Klaus G. Grunert,et al.  A review of European research on consumer response to nutrition information on food labels , 2007, Journal of Public Health.

[43]  Paula Varela,et al.  MAIN FACTORS UNDERLYING CONSUMERS' FOOD CHOICE: A FIRST STEP FOR THE UNDERSTANDING OF ATTITUDES TOWARD “HEALTHY EATING” , 2011 .

[44]  Paula Varela,et al.  Packaging information as a modulator of consumers’ perception of enriched and reduced-calorie biscuits in tasting and non-tasting tests , 2012 .