The effect of fat content on visual attention and choice of red meat and differences across gender

Food Quality and Preference

Volumn 52, Issue , 2016, Pages 42-51

  Banović, Marija ^a   Chrysochou, Polymeros ^a,b   Grunert, Klaus G ^a   Rosa, Pedro J ^c,d,e,f   Gamito, Pedro ^c,d  

^a AARHUS UNIVERSITY   (Denmark)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH AUSTRALIA   (Australia)

^c Lusophone University Copelabs   (Portugal)

^d UNIVERSIDADE LUSÓFONA DE HUMANIDADES E TECNOLOGIAS   (Portugal)

^e INSTITUTO UNIVERSITÁRIO DE LISBOA ISCTE IUL   (Portugal)

^f GIINCO Grupo Internacional de Investigación Neuro Conductual   (Colombia)

Author keywords

Choice; Fat content; Gender; Red meat; Visual attention

Indexed keywords

EID: 84962422553     PISSN: 09503293     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.foodqual.2016.03.017     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. Banović M., Fontes M.A., Barreira M.M., Grunert K.G. Impact of product familiarity on beef quality perception. Agribusiness 2012, 28(2):157-172.
2. Banović M., Grunert K.G., Barreira M.M., Fontes M.A. Beef quality perception at the point of purchase: A study from Portugal. Food Quality and Preference 2009, 20(4):335-342.
3. Banović M., Grunert K.G., Barreira M.M., Fontes M.A. Consumers' quality perception of national branded, national store branded, and imported store branded beef. Meat Science 2010, 84(1):54-65.
4. Banović M., Rosa P., Gamito P. Eye of the beholder: Visual search, attention and product choice. I See me, you see me: Inferring cognitive and emotional processes from gazing behaviour 2014, Cambridge Scholars Publishing, Newcastle upon Tyne. P.S.P. Gamito, P.J. Rosa, I. See (Eds.).
5. Bayliss A.P., Pellegrino G.D, Tipper S.P. Sex differences in eye gaze and symbolic cueing of attention. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 2005, 58(4):631-650.
6. Bialkova S., Grunert K.G., Juhl H.J., Wasowicz-Kirylo G., Stysko-Kunkowska M., van Trijp H. Attention mediates the effect of nutrition label information on consumers' choice. Evidence from a choice experiment involving eye-tracking. Appetite 2014, 76:66-75.
7. Bialkova S., van Trijp H. What determines consumer attention to nutrition labels?. Food Quality and Preference 2010, 21(8):1042-1051.
8. Bialkova S., van Trijp H. An efficient methodology for assessing attention to and effect of nutrition information displayed front-of-pack. Food Quality and Preference 2011, 22(6):592-601.
9. Bredahl L. Cue utilisation and quality perception with regard to branded beef. Food Quality and Preference 2004, 15(1):65-75.
10. Brunsø K., Bredahl L., Grunert K.G., Scholderer J. Consumer perception of the quality of beef resulting from various fattening regimes. Livestock Production Science 2005, 94(1-2):83-93.
11. Chernev A. Goal-attribute compatibility in consumer choice. Journal of Consumer Psychology 2004, 14(1):141-150.
12. Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences 1988, L. In: Erlbaum, Hillsdale, New Jersey. 2nd ed.
13. Coley A., Burgess B. Gender differences in cognitive and affective impulse buying. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management: An International Journal 2003, 7(3):282-295.
14. Duchowski A. Eye tracking methodology: Theory and practice 2007, Springer.
15. Ellis L. Identifying and explaining apparent universal sex differences in cognition and behavior. Personality and Individual Differences 2011, 51(5):552-561.
16. Fairweather H. Sex differences in cognition. Cognition 1976, 4(3):231-280.
17. Feng J., Spence I., Pratt J. Playing an action video game reduces gender differences in spatial cognition. Psychological Science 2007, 18(10):850-855.
18. Glitsch K. Consumer perceptions of fresh meat quality: Cross-national comparison. British Food Journal 2000, 102(3):177-194.
19. Graham D.J., Orquin J.L., Visschers V.H. Eye tracking and nutrition label use: A review of the literature and recommendations for label enhancement. Food Policy 2012, 37(4):378-382.
20. Grunert K.G. What's in a steak? A cross-cultural study on the quality perception of beef. Food Quality and Preference 1997, 8(3):157-174.
21. Grunert K.G. Future trends and consumer lifestyles with regard to meat consumption. Meat Science 2006, 74(1):149-160.
22. Grunert K.G., Bredahl L., Brunsø K. Consumer perception of meat quality and implications for product development in the meat sector-A review. Meat Science 2004, 66(2):259-272.
23. Halpern D.F. Sex differences in cognitive abilities 2013, Psychology Press.
24. Hidalgo-Sotelo B., Oliva A., Torralba A. Human learning of contextual priors for object search: where does the time go?. Computer vision and pattern recognition-workshops, 2005. CVPR workshops 2005, IEEE.
25. Kähkönen P., Tuorila H. Consumer responses to reduced and regular fat content in different products: Effects of gender, involvement and health concern. Food Quality and Preference 1999, 10(2):83-91.
26. Kiefer I., Rathmanner T., Kunze M. Eating and dieting differences in men and women. Journal of Men's Health and Gender 2005, 2(2):194-201.
27. Kubberød E., Ueland Ø., Rødbotten M., Westad F., Risvik E. Gender specific preferences and attitudes towards meat. Food Quality and Preference 2002, 13(5):285-294.
28. Kubberød E., Ueland Ø., Tronstad Å., Risvik E. Attitudes towards meat and meat-eating among adolescents in Norway: A qualitative study. Appetite 2002, 38(1):53-62.
29. Marian L., Chrysochou P., Krystallis A., Thøgersen J. The role of price as a product attribute in the organic food context: An exploration based on actual purchase data. Food Quality and Preference 2014, 37:52-60.
30. McNeill S.H. Inclusion of red meat in healthful dietary patterns. Meat Science 2014, 98(3):452-460.
31. Nowlis S.M., Simonson I. Attribute-task compatibility as a determinant of consumer preference reversals. Journal of Marketing Research 1997, 34(2):205-218.
32. Pieters R., Warlop L. Visual attention during brand choice: The impact of time pressure and task motivation. International Journal of Research in Marketing 1999, 16(1):1-16.
33. Quagrainie K.K., Unterschultz J., Veeman M. Effects of product origin and selected demographics on consumer choice of red meats. Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie 1998, 46(2):201-219.
34. Rosnow R.L., Rosenthal R., Rubin D.B. Contrasts and correlations in effect-size estimation. Psychological Science 2000, 11(6):446-453.
35. Rozin P., Bauer R., Catanese D. Food and life, pleasure and worry, among American college students: Gender differences and regional similarities. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 2003, 85(1):132.
36. Rozin P., Hormes J.M., Faith M.S., Wansink B. Is meat male? A quantitative multimethod framework to establish metaphoric relationships. Journal of Consumer Research 2012, 39(3):629-643.
37. Russell C., Cox D. Understanding middle-aged consumers' perceptions of meat using repertory grid methodology. Food Quality and Preference 2004, 15(4):317-329.
38. Shen J., Itti L. Top-down influences on visual attention during listening are modulated by observer sex. Vision Research 2012, 65:62-76.
39. Ueland Ø. Gender differences in food choice 2007, Woodhead Publishing.
40. Van Elswyk M.E., McNeill S.H. Impact of grass/forage feeding versus grain finishing on beef nutrients and sensory quality: The US experience. Meat Science 2014, 96(1):535-540.
41. Van Wezemael L., Verbeke W., de Barcellos M., Scholderer J., Perez-Cueto F. Consumer perceptions of beef healthiness: Results from a qualitative study in four European countries. BMC Public Health 2010, 10(1):342.
42. Wardle J., Haase A.M., Steptoe A., Nillapun M., Jonwutiwes K., Bellisie F. Gender differences in food choice: The contribution of health beliefs and dieting. Annals of Behavioral Medicine 2004, 27(2):107-116.
43. Wedel M., Pieters R. Eye tracking for visual marketing 2008, Now Publishers Inc.
44. Yonker J.E., Eriksson E., Nilsson L.-G., Herlitz A. Sex differences in episodic memory: Minimal influence of estradiol. Brain and Cognition 2003, 52(2):231-238.