Consumption context in consumer research: methodological perspectives

Current Opinion in Food Science

Volumn 15, Issue , 2017, Pages 30-37

  Jaeger, Sara R ^a   Porcherot, Christelle ^b  

^a THE NEW ZEALAND INSTITUTE FOR PLANT AND FOOD RESEARCH LIMITED   (New Zealand)

^b Email:   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85019390144     PISSN: 22147993     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.cofs.2017.05.001     Document Type: Review

References (115)

1. Thomson, D.M.H., Conceptual profiling. Meiselman, H., (eds.) Emotion Measurement, 2016, Woodhead Publishing, 239–272.
2. Schutz, H.G., Jaeger, S.R., Innovation in sensory practice and education: an interview with Howard Schutz. Jaeger, S.R., MacFie, H., (eds.) Consumer-Driven Innovation in Food and Personal Care Products, 2010, Woodhead Publishing, 102–131.
3. Schutz, H.G., Beyond preference: appropriateness as a measure of contextual acceptance of food. Thomson, D.M.H., (eds.) Food Acceptability, 1988, Elsevier, 115–134.
4. Cardello, A.V., Schutz, H.G., Food appropriateness measures as an adjunct to consumer preference/acceptability evaluation. Food Qual. Prefer. 7 (1996), 239–249.
5. Hersleth, M., Lengard, V., Verbeke, W., Guerrero, L., Næs, T., Consumers’ acceptance of innovations in dry-cured ham: impact of reduced salt content, prolonged aging time and new origin. Food Qual. Prefer. 22 (2011), 31–41.
6. Elzerman, J.E., Hoek, A.C., van Boekel, M.A.J.S., Luning, P.A., Consumer acceptance and appropriateness of meat substitutes in a meal context. Food Qual. Prefer. 22 (2011), 233–240.
7. Elzerman, J.E., Hoek, A.C., van Boekel, M.J.A.S., Luning, P.A., Appropriateness, acceptance and sensory preferences based on visual information: a web-based survey on meat substitutes in a meal context. Food Qual. Prefer. 42 (2015), 56–65.
8. 8• Cardello, A.V., Pineau, B., Paisley, A.G., Roigard, C.M., Chheang, S.L., Guo, L.F., Hedderley, D.I., Jaeger, S.R., Cognitive and emotional differentiators for beer: an exploratory study focusing on uniqueness. Food Qual. Prefer. 54 (2016), 23–38 Recent product specific application of IBU method, in conjunction with other “beyond liking” variables.
9. Stolzenbach, S., Bredie, W.L., Byrne, D.V., Consumer concepts in new product development of local foods: traditional versus novel honeys. Food Res. Int. 52 (2013), 144–152.
10. Giacalone, D., Jaeger, S.R., Better the devil you know? How product familiarity affects usage versatility of foods and beverages. J. Econ. Psychol. 55 (2016), 120–138.
11. Piqueras-Fiszman, B., Jaeger, S.R., What makes meals ‘memorable’? A consumer-centric exploration. Food Res. Int. 76:Part 2 (2015), 233–242.
12. Machín, L., Giménez, A., Vidal, L., Ares, G., Influence of context on motives underlying food choice. J. Sens. Stud. 29 (2014), 313–324.
13. Jaeger, S.R., Bava, C.M., Worch, T., Dawson, J., Marshall, D.W., The food choice kaleidoscope. A framework for structured description of product, place and person as sources of variation in food choices. Appetite 56 (2011), 412–423.
14. Blake, C.E., Bisogni, C.A., Sobal, J., Devine, C.M., Jastran, M., Classifying foods in contexts: how adults categorize foods for different eating settings. Appetite 49 (2007), 500–510.
15. Jaeger, S.R., Rossiter, K.L., Lau, K., Consumer perceptions of novel fruit and familiar fruit: a repertory grid application. J. Sci. Food Agric. 85 (2005), 480–488.
16. Elzerman, J.E., Van Boekel, M.A.J.S., Luning, P.A., Exploring meat substitutes: consumer experiences and contextual factors. Br. Food J. 115 (2013), 700–710.
17. Hartwell, H.J., Shepherd, P.A., Edwards, J.S., Johns, N., What do patients value in the hospital meal experience?. Appetite 96 (2016), 293–298.
18. de Andrade, J.C., de Aguiar Sobral, L., Ares, G., Deliza, R., Understanding consumers’ perception of lamb meat using free word association. Meat Sci. 117 (2016), 68–74.
19. Jaeger, S.R., Rose, J.M., Stated choice experimentation, contextual influences and food choice: a case study. Food Qual. Prefer. 19 (2008), 539–564.
20. Almli, V.L., Næs, T., Enderli, G., Sulmont-Rossé, C., Issanchou, S., Hersleth, M., Consumers’ acceptance of innovations in traditional cheese. A comparative study in France and Norway. Appetite 57 (2011), 110–120.
21. 21•• Meiselman, H.L., A review of the current state of emotion research in product development. Food Res. Int. 76:Part 2 (2015), 192–199 Draws attention to the ongoing interest in emotion research and identifies context as a factor that influences product-emotion associations.
22. Piqueras-Fiszman, B., Jaeger, S.R., The impact of evoked consumption contexts and appropriateness on emotion responses. Food Qual. Prefer. 32 (2014), 277–288.
23. Piqueras-Fiszman, B., Jaeger, S.R., Emotion responses under evoked consumption contexts: a focus on the consumers’ frequency of product consumption and the stability of responses. Food Qual. Prefer. 35 (2014), 24–31.
24. Piqueras-Fiszman, B., Jaeger, S.R., The impact of the means of context evocation on consumers’ emotion associations towards eating occasions. Food Qual. Prefer. 37 (2014), 61–70.
25. Piqueras-Fiszman, B., Jaeger, S.R., The effect of product–context appropriateness on emotion associations in evoked eating occasions. Food Qual. Prefer. 40 (2015), 49–60.
26. 26• Piqueras-Fiszman, B., Jaeger, S.R., Emotions associated to mealtimes: memorable meals and typical evening meals. Food Res. Int. 76:Part 2 (2015), 243–252 Draws attention to the importance of contextual factors in meal experiences.
27. Meiselman, H.L., The future in sensory/consumer research: …………evolving to a better science. Food Qual. Prefer. 27 (2013), 208–214.
28. 28•• Jaeger, S.R., Hort, J., Porcherot, C., Ares, G., Pecore, S., MacFie, H.J.H., Future directions in sensory and consumer science: four perspectives and audience voting. Food Qual. Prefer. 56:Part B (2017), 301–309 Draws attention to the increasing desire for ecological validity in sensory and consumer research.
29. Dubois, D., Rucker, D.D., Galinsky, A.D., Super size me: product size as a signal of status. J. Consum. Res. 38 (2012), 1047–1062.
30. van Kleef, E., Otten, K., van Trijp, H.C., Healthy snacks at the checkout counter: a lab and field study on the impact of shelf arrangement and assortment structure on consumer choices. BMC Public Health, 12, 2012, 1072.
31. Fernandez, P., Bensafi, M., Rouby, C., Giboreau, A., Does olfactory specific satiety take place in a natural setting?. Appetite 60 (2013), 1–4.
32. Edwards, J.S.A., Hartwell, H.J., Brown, L., The relationship between emotions, food consumption and meal acceptability when eating out of the home. Food Qual. Prefer. 30 (2013), 22–32.
33. Visschers, V.H., Siegrist, M., Does better for the environment mean less tasty? Offering more climate-friendly meals is good for the environment and customer satisfaction. Appetite 95 (2015), 475–483.
34. Redden, J.P., Mann, T., Vickers, Z., Mykerezi, E., Reicks, M., Elsbernd, S., Serving first in isolation increases vegetable intake among elementary schoolchildren. PLoS One, 10, 2015, e0121283, 10.1371/journal.pone.0121283.
35. Silva, A.P., Jager, G., Voss, H.-P., van Zyl, H., Hogg, T., Pintado, M., de Graaf, C., What's in a name? The effect of congruent and incongruent product names on liking and emotions when consuming beer or non-alcoholic beer in a bar. Food Qual. Prefer. 55 (2017), 58–66.
36. Boutrolle, I., Delarue, J., Studying meals in the home and in the laboratory. Meiselman, H.L., (eds.) Meals in Science and Practice: Interdisciplinary Research and Business Applications, 2009, Woodhead Publishing, 128–165.
37. 37•• Delarue, J., Boutrolle, I., The effects of context on liking: implications for hedonic measurements in new product development. Jaeger, S.R., MacFie, H., (eds.) Consumer-Driven Innovation in Food and Personal Care Products, 2010, Woodhead Publishing, 175–218 Includes a systematic comparison of lab vs. at-home tests for product acceptability and factors influences differences/similarities in results.
38. Meillon, S., Urbano, C., Guillot, G., Schlich, P., Acceptability of partially dealcoholized wines—measuring the impact of sensory and information cues on overall liking in real-life settings. Food Qual. Prefer. 21 (2010), 763–773.
39. Heide, M., Ottar Olsen, S., Calvo Dopico, D., The influence of test situation and satisfaction with preparation on evaluation and intention to consume a new seafood product. Br. Food J. 112 (2010), 763–774.
40. Montouto-Graña, M., Cabanas-Arias, S., Porto-Fojo, S., Vázquez-Odériz, M.L., Romero-Rodríguez, M.A., Sensory characteristics and consumer acceptance and purchase intention toward fresh-cut potatoes. J. Food Sci. 77 (2012), 40–46.
41. Shaviklo, G.R., Thorkelsson, G., Sveinsdottir, K., Pourreza, F., Studies on processing, consumer survey and storage stability of a ready-to-reconstitute fish cutlet mix. J. Food Sci. Technol. 50 (2013), 900–908.
42. Hoek, A.C., Elzerman, J.E., Hageman, R., Kok, F.J., Luning, P.A., de Graaf, C., Are meat substitutes liked better over time? A repeated in-home use test with meat substitutes or meat in meals. Food Qual. Prefer. 28 (2013), 253–263.
43. Kremer, S., Shimojo, R., Holthuysen, N., Köster, E., Mojet, J., Consumer acceptance of salt-reduced soy sauce bread over repeated in home consumption. Food Qual. Prefer. 28 (2013), 484–491.
44. Boquin, M., Smith-Simpson, S., Donovan, S.M., Lee, S.-Y., Mealtime behaviors and food consumption of perceived picky and nonpicky eaters through home use test. J. Food Sci. 79 (2014), 2523–2532.
45. De Groote, H., Chege, C.K., Tomlins, K., Gunaratna, N.S., Combining experimental auctions with a modified home-use test to assess rural consumers’ acceptance of quality protein maize, a biofortified crop. Food Qual. Prefer. 38 (2014), 1–13.
46. Lange, C., Combris, P., Issanchou, S., Schlich, P., Impact of information and in-home sensory exposure on liking and willingness to pay: the beginning of Fairtrade labeled coffee in France. Food Res. Int. 76 (2015), 317–324.
47. Aaslyng, M.D., Broge, E.H.D.L., Brockhoff, P.B., Christensen, R.H., The effect of skatole and androstenone on consumer response towards streaky bacon and pork belly roll. Meat Sci. 110 (2015), 52–61.
48. Soerensen, J.G., Waehrens, S.S., Byrne, D.V., Predicting and understanding long-term consumer liking of standard versus novel chocolate: a repeated exposure study. J. Sens. Stud. 30 (2015), 370–380.
49. Ruark, A., Vingerhoeds, M.H., Kremer, S., Nijenhuis-de Vries, M.A., Piqueras-Fiszman, B., Insights on older adults’ perception of at-home sensory-hedonic methods: a case of ideal profile method and CATA with ideal. Food Qual. Prefer. 53 (2016), 29–38.
50. 50•• Danner, L., Ristic, R., Johnson, T.E., Meiselman, H.L., Hoek, A.C., Jeffery, D.W., Bastian, S.E., Context and wine quality effects on consumers’ mood, emotions, liking and willingness to pay for Australian Shiraz wines. Food Res. Int. 89 (2016), 254–265 Product specific study that empirically compares different test environments using variables beyond liking.
51. Péneau, S., Hoehn, E., Roth, H.-R., Escher, F., Nuessli, J., Importance and consumer perception of freshness of apples. Food Qual. Prefer. 17 (2006), 9–19.
52. Jaeger, S.R., Axten, L.G., Wohlers, M.W., Sun-Waterhouse, D.X., Polyphenol-rich beverages: insights from sensory and consumer science. J. Sci. Food Agric. 89 (2009), 2356–2363.
53. Shaviklo, G.R., Olafsdottir, A., Sveinsdottir, K., Thorkelsson, G., Rafipour, F., Quality characteristics and consumer acceptance of a high fish protein puffed corn-fish snack. J. Food Sci. Technol. 48 (2011), 668–676.
54. Debucquet, G., Cornet, J., Adam, I., Cardinal, M., Perception of oyster-based products by French consumers: the effect of processing and role of social representations. Appetite 59 (2012), 844–852.
55. Giacalone, D., Bredie, W.L.P., Frøst, M.B., All-In-One Test (AI1): a rapid and easily applicable approach to consumer product testing. Food Qual. Prefer. 27 (2013), 108–119.
56. Arildsen Jakobsen, L.M., Vuholm, S., Aaslyng, M.D., Kristensen, M., Sørensen, K.V., Raben, A., Kehlet, U., Sensory characteristics and consumer liking of sausages with 10% fat and added rye or wheat bran. Food Sci. Nutr. 2 (2014), 534–546.
57. Tuorila, H., Palmujoki, I., Kytö, E., Törnwall, O., Vehkalahti, K., School meal acceptance depends on the dish, student, and context. Food Qual. Prefer. 46 (2015), 126–136.
58. Baker, S.L., McCabe, S.D., Swithers, S.E., Payne, C.R., Kranz, S., Do healthy, child-friendly fruit and vegetable snacks appeal to consumers? A field study exploring adults’ perceptions and purchase intentions. Food Qual. Prefer. 39 (2015), 202–208.
59. Hartvig, D.L., Laugesen, S.M.B., Bredie, W.L.P., Acceptability of novel maize soups for senior home-dwelling citizens: energy density and visually appetising toppings. The 7th European Conference on Sensory and Consumer Research 11–14 September 2016, Dijon, France, 2016.
60. Payne, C.R., Wansink, B., Doing consumer research in the field. Jaeger, S.R., MacFie, H., (eds.) Consumer-Driven Innovation in Food and Personal Care Products, 2010, Woodhead Publishing, 358–385.
61. 61• Trafimow, D., Leonhardt, J.M., Niculescu, M., Payne, C., A method for evaluating and selecting field experiment locations. Mark. Lett. 27 (2016), 437–447 Useful reference for those planning to conduct field research in non-lab settings.
62. Posri, W., Macfie, H.A.L., The influence of testing context on tea bag product acceptance in central location tests. J. Sens. Stud. 23 (2008), 835–851.
63. Miele, N.A., Di Monaco, R., Cavella, S., Masi, P., Effect of meal accompaniments on the acceptability of a walnut oil-enriched mayonnaise with and without a health claim. Food Qual. Prefer. 21 (2010), 470–477.
64. Di Monaco, R., Giacalone, D., Pepe, O., Masi, P., Cavella, S., Effect of social interaction and meal accompaniments on acceptability of sourdough prepared croissants: an exploratory study. Food Res. Int. 66 (2014), 325–331.
65. García-Segovia, P., Harrington, R.J., Seo, H.-S., Influences of table setting and eating location on food acceptance and intake. Food Qual. Prefer. 39 (2015), 1–7.
66. Labbe, D., Ferrage, A., Rytz, A., Pace, J., Martin, N., Pleasantness, emotions and perceptions induced by coffee beverage experience depend on the consumption motivation (hedonic or utilitarian). Food Qual. Prefer. 44 (2015), 56–61.
67. Meier-Dinkel, L., Strack, M., Höinghaus, K., Mörlein, D., Consumers dislike boar taint related off-flavours in pork chops regardless of a meal context. Meat Sci. 122 (2016), 119–124.
68. 68•• Cruwys, T., Bevelander, K.E., Hermans, R.C., Social modeling of eating: a review of when and why social influence affects food intake and choice. Appetite 86 (2015), 3–18 Comprehensive review that considers an important contextual variable in food-related behaviour.
69. 69•• Kim, S.-E., Lee, S.M., Kim, K.-O., Consumer acceptability of coffee as affected by situational conditions and involvement. Food Qual. Prefer. 52 (2016), 124–132 Systematic manipulation of contextual factors to create consumption contexts that are less lab-like.
70. Hein, K.A., Hamid, N., Jaeger, S.R., Delahunty, C.M., Application of a written scenario to evoke a consumption context in a laboratory setting: effects on hedonic ratings. Food Qual. Prefer. 21 (2010), 410–416.
71. Hein, K.A., Hamid, N., Jaeger, S.R., Delahunty, C.M., Effects of evoked consumption contexts on hedonic ratings: a case study with two fruit beverages. Food Qual. Prefer. 26 (2012), 35–44.
72. Lusk, K.A., Hamid, N., Delahunty, C.M., Jaeger, S.R., Effects of an evoked refreshing consumption context on hedonic responses to apple juice measured using best-worst scaling and the 9-pt hedonic category scale. Food Qual. Prefer. 43 (2015), 21–25.
73. Äström, A., Gilbert, C., Köster, E.P., Mojet, J., Wendin, K., Simulating specific eating and drinking situations in a consumer testing context. The 9th Panborn Sensory Science Symposium 4–8 September 2011, Toronto, Canada, 2011.
74. 74•• Hersleth, M., Monteleone, E., Segtnan, A., Næs, T., Effects of evoked meal contexts on consumers’ responses to intrinsic and extrinsic product attributes in dry-cured ham. Food Qual. Prefer. 40 (2015), 191–198 Well-executed empirical study, in a specific product category (ham) that illustrates importance of meal context/framing on consumer perception.
75. Bilman, E., Van Trijp, J., Renes, R., Consumer perceptions of satiety-related snack food decision making. Appetite 55 (2010), 639–647.
76. Peake, W.O., Detre, J.D., Carlson, C.C., One bad apple spoils the bunch? An exploration of broad consumption changes in response to food recalls. Food Policy 49 (2014), 13–22.
77. Baumann, C., Hamin, H., Premium generic brand (PGB) choice vis-à-vis generic and national brands: a scenario comparison for self-use, family consumption and gift giving in a food versus non-food and cross-cultural context. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 21 (2014), 492–501.
78. Methven, L., Jiménez-Pranteda, M.L., Lawlor, J.B., Sensory and consumer science methods used with older adults: a review of current methods and recommendations for the future. Food Qual. Prefer. 48 (2016), 333–344.
79. Morell, P., Fiszman, S., Varela, P., Hernando, I., Hydrocolloids for enhancing satiety: relating oral digestion to rheology, structure and sensory perception. Food Hydrocoll. 41 (2014), 343–353.
80. 80•• Giménez, A., Gagliardi, A., Ares, G., Influence of evoked contexts on consumers’ rejection of two products: implications for shelf life estimation. Food Res. Int. 76 (2015), 527–531 Illustrates the use of evoked contexts in a non-typical application: shelf-life testing.
81. 81•• Köster, E.P., The psychology of food choice: some often encountered fallacies. Food Qual. Prefer. 14 (2003), 359–373 Important underpinning reading regarding context, and not taking sufficient account hereof in sensory and consumer research.
82. 82•• Jaeger, S.R., Fiszman, S., Reis, F., Chheang, S.L., Kam, K., Pineau, B., Deliza, R., Ares, G., Influence of evoked contexts on hedonic product discrimination and sensory characterizations using CATA questions. Food Qual. Prefer. 56:Part A (2017), 138–148 Multiple studies with written scenarios to evoke context and comparison to no evoked context. Illustrates that evoked context can have some vs. no influence on product perception.
83. Dorado, R., Chaya, C., Tarrega, A., Hort, J., The impact of using a written scenario when measuring emotional response to beer. Food Qual. Prefer. 50 (2016), 38–47.
84. Alexander, C.S., Becker, H.J., The use of vignettes in survey research. Public Opin. Q. 42 (1978), 93–104.
85. Surprenant, C., Churchill, G.A. Jr, Can role playing be substituted for actual consumption?. Adv. Consum. Res. 11 (1984), 122–126.
86. Bitner, M.J., Evaluating service encounters: the effects of physical surroundings and employee responses. J. Mark. 54 (1990), 69–82.
87. Schacter, D.L., Addis, D.R., Buckner, R.L., Episodic simulation of future events. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 1124 (2008), 39–60.
88. 88•• Bangcuyo, R.G., Smith, K.J., Zumach, J.L., Pierce, A.M., Guttman, G.A., Simons, C.T., The use of immersive technologies to improve consumer testing: the role of ecological validity, context and engagement in evaluating coffee. Food Qual. Prefer. 41 (2015), 84–95 Empirical study with creation of immersive testing environment that simulates real-world experience. Product specific but illustrative case study.
89. Petit, C., Sieffermann, J.M., Testing consumer preferences for iced-coffee: does the drinking environment have any influence?. Food Qual. Prefer. 18 (2007), 161–172.
90. Sester, C., Deroy, O., Sutan, A., Galia, F., Desmarchelier, J.-F., Valentin, D., Dacremont, C., Having a drink in a bar: an immersive approach to explore the effects of context on drink choice. Food Qual. Prefer. 28 (2013), 23–31.
91. Witmer, B.G., Singer, M.J., Measuring presence in virtual environments: a presence questionnaire. Presence: Teleop. Virt. Environ. 7 (1998), 225–240.
92. Scholz, J., Smith, A.N., Designing immersive experiences that maximize consumer engagement. Bus. Horiz. 59 (2016), 149–161.
93. Ahn, S.J.G., Bailenson, J.N., Park, D., Short-and long-term effects of embodied experiences in immersive virtual environments on environmental locus of control and behavior. Comput. Hum. Behav. 39 (2014), 235–245.
94. Serrano, B., Botella, C., Baños, R.M., Alcañiz, M., Using virtual reality and mood-induction procedures to test products with consumers of ceramic tiles. Comput. Hum. Behav. 29 (2013), 648–653.
95. Morris, L.D., Louw, Q.A., Grimmer-Somers, K., The effectiveness of virtual reality on reducing pain and anxiety in burn injury patients: a systematic review. Clin. J. Pain 25 (2009), 815–826.
96. Yip, B.C., Man, D.W., Virtual reality-based prospective memory training program for people with acquired brain injury. Neurorehabilitation 32 (2013), 103–115.
97. Cesa, G.L., Manzoni, G.M., Bacchetta, M., Castelnuovo, G., Conti, S., Gaggioli, A., Mantovani, F., Molinari, E., Cárdenas-López, G., Riva, G., Virtual reality for enhancing the cognitive behavioral treatment of obesity with binge eating disorder: randomized controlled study with one-year follow-up. J. Med. Internet Res., 15, 2013, e113.
98. Perpiñá, C., Roncero, M., Similarities and differences between eating disorders and obese patients in a virtual environment for normalizing eating patterns. Compr. Psychiatry 67 (2016), 39–45.
99. Gutiérrez-Maldonado, J., Wiederhold, B.K., Riva, G., Future directions: how virtual reality can further improve the assessment and treatment of eating disorders and obesity. Cyberpsychol. Behav. Soc. Netw. 19 (2016), 148–153.
100. Bordegoni, M., Carulli, M., Evaluating industrial products in an innovative visual-olfactory environment. J. Comput. Inf. Sci. Eng., 16, 2016 art. no. 031004.
101. Carulli, M., Bordegoni, M., Cugini, U., Integrating scents simulation in virtual reality multisensory environment for industrial products evaluation. Comput. Aided Des. Appl. 13 (2016), 320–328.
102. Ramic-Brkic, B., Chalmers, A., Virtual smell: authentic smell diffusion in virtual environments. The 7th International Conference on Computer Graphics, Virtual Reality, Visualisation and Interaction in Africa 21–23 June 2010, Franschhoek, South Africa, ACM, 2010, 45–52.
103. Tortell, R., Luigi, D., Dozois, A., Bouchard, S., Morie, J.F., Ilan, D., The effects of scent and game play experience on memory of a virtual environment. Virt. Real. 11 (2007), 61–68.
104. Porcherot, C., Delplanque, S., Ischer, M., De Marles, A., Cayeux, I., Applying immersive virtual reality to the study of emotions elicited by scents. What is the value of a virtual experimental setting?. The 11th Pangborn Sensory Science Symposium 23–27 August 2015, Gothenburg, Sweden, 2015.
105. Porcherot, C., Delplanque, S., Cayeux, I., Use of immersive virtual reality for the study of emotions elicited by scent. ESN Workwhop: The Future is Digital. The 7th European Conference on Sensory and Consumer Research 11–14 September 2016, Dijon, France, 2016.
106. Ischer, M., Baron, N., Mermoud, C., Cayeux, I., Porcherot, C., Sander, D., Delplanque, S., How incorporation of scents could enhance immersive virtual experiences. Front. Psychol., 5, 2014, 736.
107. Brunswik, E., Perception and the Representative Design of Psychological Experiments. 2nd ed, 1956, University of California Press, Berkley.
108. Campbell, D.T., Stanley, J.C., Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Gage, N., (eds.) Handbook of Research on Teaching, 1963, Rand McNally, 171–246.
109. Scheidt, R.J., Ecologically-valid inquiry: fait accompli?. Hum. Dev. 24 (1981), 225–228.
110. Cook, T.D., Shadish, W.R., Social experiments: some developments over the past fifteen years. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 45 (1994), 545–580.
111. 111•• Schmuckler, M.A., What is ecological validity? A dimensional analysis. Infancy 2 (2001), 419–436 Dimensional analysis of ecological validity that identifies the most important factors and their importance in contributing to more/less ecovoligcal validity of research. Include useful background references to valifity in general.
112. Mook, D.G., In defense of external invalidity. Am. Psychol. 38 (1983), 379–389.
113. Brewer, M.B., Research design and issues of validity. Reis, H.J., Judd, C., (eds.) Handbook of Research Methods in Social and Personality Psychology, 2000, Cambridge University Press, 3–16.
114. Aronson, E., Wilson, T.D., Brewer, M.B., Experimentation in social psychology., 4th ed Gilbert, D.T., Fiske, S.T., Lindzey, G., (eds.) The Handbook of Social Psychology, vol. 1, 1998, McGraw-Hill, 99–142.
115. Meiselman, H.L., Methodology and theory in human eating research. Appetite 19 (1992), 49–55.