Uruguayan consumers' perception of functional foods

Journal of Sensory Studies

Volumn 23, Issue 5, 2008, Pages 614-630

  Ares, Gastón ^a   Giménez, Ana ^a   Gámbaro, Adriana ^a  

^a UNIVERSIDAD DE LA REPÚBLICA   (Uruguay)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 52349111342     PISSN: 08878250     EISSN: 1745459X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1745-459X.2008.00176.x     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. ADA REPORTS. 2004. Position of the American Dietetic Association: Functional foods. J. Am. Diet. Assoc. 104, 814, 826.
2. BECH-LARSEN, T. GRUNERT, K.G. 2003. The perceived healthiness of functional foods. A conjoint study of Danish, Finnish and American consumers' perception of functional foods. Appetite 40, 9 14.
3. BECH-LARSEN, T., GRUNERT, K.G. POULSEN, J.B. 2001. The acceptance of functional foods in Denmark, Finland and the United States. A study of consumers' conjoint evaluations of the qualities of functional food and perceptions of general health factors and cultural values. Working Paper No. 73, MAPP, Århus, Denmark.
4. BOGUE, J. RYAN, M. 2000. Market-oriented new product development: Functional foods and the Irish consumer. Agribusiness Discussion Paper No. 27, Department of Food Economics, National University of Ireland, Cork, Ireland.
5. CHILDS, N.M. PORYZEES, G.H. 1998. Foods that help prevent disease: Consumer attitudes and public policy implications. Br. Food J. 9, 419, 426.
6. DAGEVOS, H. 2005. Consumers as four-faced creatures. Looking at food consumption from the perspective of contemporary consumers. Appetite 45, 32 39.
7. HILLIAM, M. 1998. The market for functional foods. Int. Dairy J. 8, 349 353.
8. ILSI EUROPE. 2002. Concepts of functional foods. ILSI Europe Concise Monograph Series, Brussels, Belgium.
9. INE. 2005. INE Población, Instituto Nacional de Estadísticas, Montevideo, Uruguay.
10. JAEGER, S.R. 2006. Non-sensory factors in sensory science research. Food Qual. Prefer. 17, 132 144.
11. LÄHTEENMÄKI, L. 2003. Consumers and functional foods. In Functional Dairy Products (T. Mattila-Sandholm M. Saarela, eds.) Woodhead Publication Ltd., Cambridge, U.K.
12. MENRAD, K. 2003. Market and marketing of functional food in Europe. J. Food Eng. 56, 181, 188.
13. MSP. 2003. Estadísticas Vitals, Departamento de información poblacional, Dirección General de Salud, Ministerio de Salud Pública, Montevideo, Uruguay.
14. PACHTER, L.M., SHEEHAN, J. CLOUTIER, M.M. 2000. Factor subscale of a parental health locus of control instrument (parental health belief scales) for use in a mainland United States and Puerto Rican community. Soc. Sci. Med. 50, 715 721.
15. POULSEN, J.B. 1999. Danish consumers' attitudes towards functional foods. Working Paper No. 62, MAPP, Århus, Denmark.
16. ROE, B., LEVY, A.S. DERBY, B.M. 1999. The impact of health claims on consumer search and product evaluation outcomes: Results from FDA experimental data. J. Public Policy Mark. 18 (1 89 105.
17. SHIMIZU, T. 2003. Health claims and scientific substantiation of functional foods - Japanese system aiming the global standard. Curr. Top. Nutraceutical Res. 1 (2 1 12.
18. STEPTOE, A., POLLARD, T. WARDLE, J. 1995. Development of a measure of the motives underlying the selection of food: The food choice questionnaire. Appetite 25, 267 284.
19. URALA, N. LÄHTEENMÄKI, L. 2003. Reasons behind consumers' functional food choices. Nutr. Food Sci. 33, 148 158.
20. URALA, N. LÄHTEENMÄKI, L. 2004. Attitudes behind consumers' willingness to use functional foods. Food Qual. Prefer. 15, 793 803.
21. VAN KLEEF, E., VAN TRIJP, H.C.M. LUNING, P. 2005. Functional foods: Health claim-food product compatibility and the impact of health claim framing on consumer evaluation. Appetite 44, 299 308.
22. VERBEKE, W. 2005. Consumer acceptance of functional foods: Socio-demographic, cognitive and attitudinal determinants. Food Qual. Prefer. 16, 45 57.
23. WENNSTRÖM, P. 2000. Functional foods and the consumer's perception of health claims. Scand. J. Nutr. 44, 30 33.