Influence of consumers' cognitive style on results from projective mapping.

Projective mapping (PM), one of the most holistic product profiling methods in approach, is increasingly being used to uncover consumers' perception of products and packages. Assessors rely on a process of synthesis for evaluating product information, which would determine the relative importance of the perceived characteristics they use for mapping them. Individual differences are expected, as participants are not instructed on the characteristics to consider for evaluating the degree of difference among samples, generating different perceptual spaces. Individual differences in cognitive style can affect synthesis processes and thus their perception of similarities and differences among samples. In this study, the influence of the cognitive style in the results of PM was explored. Two consumer studies were performed, one aimed at describing intrinsic sensory characteristics of chocolate flavoured milk and the other one looking into extrinsic (package only) of blueberry yogurts. Consumers completed the wholistic-analytic module of the extended Verbal Imagery Cognitive Styles Test & Extended Cognitive Style Analysis-Wholistic Analytic Test, to characterize their cognitive style. Differences between wholistic and analytic consumers in how they evaluated samples using projective mapping were found in both studies. Analytics separated the samples more in the PM perceptual space than wholistic consumers, showing more discriminating abilities. This may come from a deeper analysis of the samples, both from intrinsic and extrinsic point of views. From a sensory perspective (intrinsic), analytic consumers relied on more sensory characteristics, while wholistic mainly discriminated samples according to sweetness and bitterness/chocolate flavour. In the extrinsic study however, even if analytic consumers discriminated more between packs, they described the products using similar words in the descriptive step. One important recommendation coming from this study is the need to consider higher dimensions in the interpretation of projective mapping tasks, as the first dimensions could underestimate the complexity of the perceptual space; currently, most applications of PM consider two dimensions only, which may not uncover the perception of specific groups of consumers.

[1]  John Hayes,et al.  Cognitive Style and the Theory and Practice of Individual and Collective Learning in Organizations , 1998 .

[2]  Sébastien Lê,et al.  FactoMineR: An R Package for Multivariate Analysis , 2008 .

[3]  N. Malhotra,et al.  Consumer cognitive complexity and the dimensionality of multidimensional scaling configurations , 2010 .

[4]  G. Āllport Personality: A Psychological Interpretation , 1938 .

[5]  Ian J. Deary,et al.  Examining wholistic–analytic style using preferences in early information processing , 2006 .

[6]  Ian J. Deary,et al.  On the assessment of cognitive style: four red herrings , 2003 .

[7]  S. Leek An investigation of consumers’ decision processes and styles , 1998 .

[8]  Tormod Næs,et al.  Estimating and interpreting more than two consensus components in projective mapping: INDSCAL vs. multiple factor analysis (MFA) , 2017 .

[9]  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 .

[10]  Gastón Ares,et al.  Attentional capture and importance of package attributes for consumers' perceived similarities and differences among products: A case study with breakfast cereal packages. , 2014, Food research international.

[11]  Min-A Kim,et al.  Consumer context-specific sensory acceptance tests: Effects of a cognitive warm-up on affective product discrimination , 2015 .

[12]  Tormod Næs,et al.  Outlier and group detection in sensory panels using hierarchical cluster analysis with the Procrustes distance , 2004 .

[13]  Harry T. Lawless,et al.  Perceptual mapping of citrus juices using projective mapping and profiling data from culinary professionals and consumers , 2008 .

[14]  Per B. Brockhoff,et al.  Confidence ellipses: A variation based on parametric bootstrapping applicable on Multiple Factor Analysis results for rapid graphical evaluation , 2012 .

[15]  Gastón Ares,et al.  Stability of sample configurations from projective mapping: How many consumers are necessary? , 2014 .

[16]  Ian J. Deary,et al.  A new measure of Verbal–Imagery Cognitive Style: VICS , 2005 .

[17]  Tormod Næs,et al.  Projective Mapping for interpreting wine aroma differences as perceived by naïve and experienced assessors , 2013 .

[18]  M. Graff,et al.  Wholist–analytic cognitive style: A matter of reflection , 2006 .

[19]  Gastón Ares,et al.  Can consumer segmentation in projective mapping contribute to a better understanding of consumer perception , 2016 .

[20]  F. J. Pérez Elortondo,et al.  Projective mapping in sensory analysis of ewes milk cheeses: A study on consumers and trained panel performance , 2004 .

[21]  Gastón Ares,et al.  Influence of rational and intuitive thinking styles on food choice: Preliminary evidence from an eye-tracking study with yogurt labels , 2014 .

[22]  R Core Team,et al.  R: A language and environment for statistical computing. , 2014 .

[23]  Sylvie Chollet,et al.  Invited review Quick and dirty but still pretty good: a review of new descriptive methods in food science , 2012 .

[24]  Richard J. Riding,et al.  The Effect of Cognitive Style on the Preferred Format of Instructional Material , 1997 .

[25]  Ian J. Deary,et al.  The reliability of Riding’s Cognitive Style Analysis test , 2003 .

[26]  J. Kennedy,et al.  EVALUATION OF REPLICATED PROJECTIVE MAPPING OF GRANOLA BARS , 2010 .

[27]  Sara R. Jaeger,et al.  Behavioural extensions to preference mapping : the role of synthesis , 2000 .

[28]  J. Guilford Cognitive Styles: What Are They? , 1980 .

[29]  C. Shagass,et al.  Intelligence and Personality , 1972 .

[30]  Per B. Brockhoff,et al.  Rapid descriptive sensory methods – Comparison of Free Multiple Sorting, Partial Napping, Napping, Flash Profiling and conventional profiling , 2012 .

[31]  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 .

[32]  Hildegarde Heymann,et al.  A summary of projective mapping observations – The effect of replicates and shape, and individual performance measurements , 2013 .

[33]  Todd McElroy,et al.  Framing effects: An analytic–holistic perspective ☆ , 2003 .

[34]  G. Ares,et al.  Comparison of Novel Methodologies for Sensory Characterization , 2014 .

[35]  I. Deary,et al.  Are intelligence and personality related to verbal-imagery and wholistic-analytic cognitive styles? , 2005 .

[36]  R. Nisbett,et al.  Culture and systems of thought: holistic versus analytic cognition. , 2001, Psychological review.

[37]  Jonathan Evans Dual-processing accounts of reasoning, judgment, and social cognition. , 2008, Annual review of psychology.

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

[39]  P. Robert,et al.  A Unifying Tool for Linear Multivariate Statistical Methods: The RV‐Coefficient , 1976 .

[40]  Christopher W. Allinson,et al.  Cognitive Style and the Theory and Practice of Individual and Collective Learning in Organizations , 1998 .

[41]  S. Messick The nature of cognitive styles: Problems and promise in educational practice , 1984 .

[42]  H. Lawless,et al.  Recovery of subsampled dimensions and configurations derived from napping data by MFA and MDS , 2011, Attention, perception & psychophysics.

[43]  John O. Summers,et al.  On the Validity and Reliability of Direct Similarity Judgments , 1976 .

[44]  James C. Bezdek,et al.  Pattern Recognition with Fuzzy Objective Function Algorithms , 1981, Advanced Applications in Pattern Recognition.

[45]  Gastón Ares,et al.  Sensory profiling, the blurred line between sensory and consumer science. A review of novel methods for product characterization , 2012 .

[46]  Rajesh N. Davé,et al.  Characterization and detection of noise in clustering , 1991, Pattern Recognit. Lett..