Influence of information about manufacturing process on beer acceptability

Food Quality and Preference

Volumn 15, Issue 3, 2004, Pages 271-278

  Caporale, Gabriella ^a   Monteleone, Erminio ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BASILICATA   (Italy)

Author keywords

Beer; Expectation; Genetically modified food; Organic food; Product information; Sensory

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ARTICLE; BARLEY; BEER; CONSUMER; CONTROLLED STUDY; DNA MODIFICATION; FEMALE; FOOD BIOTECHNOLOGY; FOOD PREFERENCE; FOOD PROCESSING; FOOD QUALITY; HUMAN; INFORMATION; MALE; MEDICAL RESEARCH; NEOPHOBIA; QUESTIONNAIRE; SCORING SYSTEM; SENSORY ANALYSIS; YEAST;

HORDEUM VULGARE SUBSP. VULGARE; HUMULUS LUPULUS;

EID: 0346503180     PISSN: 09503293     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0950-3293(03)00067-3     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Aaron J.I. Mela D.J. Evans R.E. The influences of attitudes, beliefs and label information on perceptions of reduced-fat spread Appetite 22 1994 25-37
2. Anderson R.E. Consumer dissatisfaction: the effect of disconfirmed expectancy on perceived product performance Journal of Marketing Research 10 1973 38-44
3. Bredahl L. Consumers' cognitions with regard to genetically modified foods Results of a qualitative study in four countries. Appetite 33 1999 343-360
4. Bredahl L. Determinants of consumer attitudes and purchase intentions with regard to genetically modified foods-results of a cross-national survey Journal of Consumer Policy 24 2001 23-61
5. Bredahl L. Grunert K.G. Frewer L. Consumer attitudes and decision-making with regard to genetically engineered food products - a review of the literature and a presentation of models for future research Journal of Consumer Policy 21 1998 251-277
6. Caporale G. Monteleone E. Effect of expectations induced by information on origin and its guarantee on the acceptability of a traditional food: olive oil Sciences des Aliments 21 2001 243-254
7. Caporale, G., Carlucci, A., & Monteleone, E. (2001). A methodological approach in studying the effect of product information on food acceptability. In The 4th Pangborn Sensory Science Symposium, 22-26 July, Dijon, France.
8. Cardello A.V. Sawyer F.M. Effects of disconfirmed consumer expectations on food acceptability Journal of Sensory Studies 7 1992 253-277
9. Daillant B. Issanchou S. Influence of sugar and fat contents on preference for cream cheese. A preliminary study Food Quality and Preference 4 1993 133-139
10. Deliza R. (1996). The effects of expectation on sensory perception and acceptance. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Reading (UK).
11. European Commission The Europeans and modern biotechnology. Eurobarometer 46.1 1997 Office for Official Publications of the European Communities Luxembourg
12. Fischoff B. Slovic P. Lichtenstein S. Read S. Combs B. How safe is safe enough? A psychometric study of attitudes towards technological risks and benefits Policy Sciences 9 1978 127-152
13. Frewer L.J. Shepherd R. Ethical concerns and risk perceptions associated with different applications of genetic engineering: interrelationships with the perceived need for regulation of the technology Agriculture and Human Values 12 1995 48-57
14. Grunert K.G. Bech-Larsen T. Bredahl L. Three issues in consumer quality perception and acceptance of dairy products International Dairy Journal 10 2000 575-584
15. Guinard J.X. Bunsaku U. Schlich P. Internal and external mapping of preferences for commercial lager beers: comparison of hedonic ratings by consumers blind versus with knowledge of brand and price Food Quality and Preference 12 4 2001 243-255
16. Johansson L. Haglund Å Berglund L. Lea P. Risvik E. Preference for tomatoes, affected by sensory attributes and information about growth conditions Food Quality and Preference 10 1999 289-298
17. Kähkönen P. Tuorila H. The role of expectations and information in sensory perception of low-fat and regular-fat in sausages Appetite 24 1995 298-299
18. Kahneman D. Tversky A. Prospect theory: an analysis of decision under risk Econometrica 47 1979 263-291
19. Lähteenmäki, L., Grunert, K., Åström, A., Ueland, O., Arvola, A., & Bech-Larsen, T. (2001). Acceptability of genetically modified cheese presented as real product alternative. In The 4th Pangborn Sensory Science Symposium, 22-26 July, Dijon, France.
20. Lange C. Rousseau F. Issanchou S. Expectation, liking and purchase behaviour under economical constraint Food Quality and Preference 10 1999 31-39
21. Næs T. Langsrud O. Fixed or random assessors in sensory profiling? Food Quality and Preference 74 1998 415-421
22. Peryam D.R. Pilgrim F.J. Hedonic scale method of measuring food preferences Food Technology 11 9 1957 9-14
23. Pliner P. Hobden K. Development of a scale to measure the trait of food neophobia in humans Appetite 19 1992 105-120
24. Schifferstein H.N.J. Kole A.P.W. Mojet J. Asimmetry in the disconfirmation of expectations for natural yogurt Appetite 32 1999 307-329
25. Shepherd, R., Sparks, P., Bellier, S., & Raats, M. (1991/1992). The effects of information on sensory rating and preferences: the importance of attitudes. Food Quality and Preference, 3, 147-155.
26. Siret F. Issanchou S. Traditional process: influence on sensory properties and on consumers' expectation and liking Application to 'pâté de campagne'. Food Quality and Preference 11 2000 217-228
27. Smythe J.E. Bamforth C.W. A study of the effect of perceived beer history on reported preferences by sensory panels with different levels of training Journal of the Institute of Brewing 108 1 2002 34-36
28. Solheim R. Consumer liking for sausages affected by sensory quality and information on fat content Appetite 19 1992 285-292
29. Torjusen H. Lieblein G. Wandel M. Francis C.A. Food system orientation and quality perception among consumers and producers of organic food in Hedmark County, Norway Food Quality and Preference 12 2001 207-216
30. Tuorila H. Cardello A.V. Lesher L.L. Antecedents and consequences of expectations related to fat-free and regular-fat foods Appetite 23 1994 247-263
31. Westcombe A. Wardle J. Influence of relative fat content information on responses to three foods Appetite 28 1997 49-62