Cognitive Antecedents of Consumers» Willingness to Purchase Fish Rich in Polyunsaturated Fatty Acids (PUFA)

Foxall, Gordon R.; Leek, Sheena; Maddock, Sarah

doi:10.1006/appe.1998.0178

Cited by 25 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Therefore, this study demonstrates that taste is also a significant reason to purchase fish, as described by Foxall et al (1998). Another finding was that consumers familiarized with fish consumption have an increased likelihood of spending a bigger proportion on fish than other animal protein, which is a result that is in line with the preferences reported by Steptoe et al (1995).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 81%

“…The influence of consumer socio‐demographics, sensory characteristics, lifestyle, food involvement, knowledge of health benefits and other beliefs on fish and meat consumption have been analyzed in a considerable number of studies, including Foxall, Leek, and Maddock (), Froehlich, Carlberg, and Ward (), Gracia and Albisu (), Latorres, Mitterer‐Daltoé, and Queiroz (), Lyford et al (), Morales et al (), Morales and Higuchi (), Olsen (), Paeratakul, Ferdinand, Champagne, Ryan, and Bray (), Polizer Rocha, Lapa‐Guimarães, de Noronha, and Trindade (), and Steptoe, Pollard, and Wardle (). Analyzing consumer expenditure on fish and meat, Tonsor and Marsh () found that Japanese consumers have a high level of culturally conditioned fish consumption that is insensitive to income and price variations, while US consumers are more pre‐conditioned to beef and pork consumption.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Should we spend more on fish?—How consumer beliefs about fish influence fish and meat expenditure shares

Morales

Higuchi

2019

Journal of Sensory Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Health benefits derived from regular fish intake have encouraged governments to promote its consumption. However, can beliefs about fish increase expenditure on fish and reduce meat expenditure? Survey data from Modern Metropolitan Lima, Peru, indicate that female respondents were more likely to spend a bigger proportion on fish, while more educated respondents spent less on fish. Also, those with a higher household income and who eat fast food regularly were more likely to spend a bigger proportion on beef. Factors that positively influence expenditure share on fish were the belief that fish is healthy and nutritious, a preference for fish flavor and familiarity with fish. Conversely, these beliefs reduced the expenditure shares on beef and chicken. These outcomes demonstrate both the positive effect of fish consumption campaigns on fish expenditure and their negative impacts on meat expenditure, which has implications for campaigns developed by governments and the meat industry. Practical applications Food policies and campaigns that promote regular fish consumption by highlighting its positive health benefits and nutritional content can influence the proportion that consumers spend on fish versus other sources of animal protein, beyond their effects on consumer preferences and willingness‐to‐pay for fish. However, these campaigns can result in reduced meat expenditure. These substitution effects between expenditure on related products, such as the case of fish and different types of meats, need to be considered by the authorities and the food industry, as new marketing strategies may need to be developed to increase the consumption of specific fish and meat products that have positive health and nutrition properties. In addition, food processors and retailers could introduce and promote new products in convenient formats for meal preparation to encourage consumption of fish and meat as part of a healthy diet.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 81%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Should we spend more on fish?—How consumer beliefs about fish influence fish and meat expenditure shares

Morales

Higuchi

2019

Journal of Sensory Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Items were: "Eating fish is … (1) healthy / (2) nutritious / (3) tasty / (4) safe." The first three items were selected based upon literature review consistently defining these issues as the most important motives for fish consumption (Bredahl & Grunert, 1997;Foxall, Leek, & Maddock, 1998;Verbeke & Vackier, 2005). The fourth item was incorporated based on exploratory research (see Pieniak, Verbeke, Vermeir, Brunsø, & Olsen, 2007), which hypothesised that perceived safety of fish was a motive rather than a barrier to many consumers.…”

Section: Segmentation Variablesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fish Market Segmentation Based on Consumers' Motives, Barriers and Risk Perception in Belgium

Vanhonacker

Pieniak

Verbeke

2010

Journal of Food Products Marketing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study's objective was to segment Belgian fish consumers based on their motives, perceived barriers, and their risk perception corresponding with fish consumption. Cross-sectional consumer data were collected in November 2004 through a self-administered questionnaire (n = 852). Cluster analysis distinguished between three consumer segments. Uncertain fish consumers indicate strong motives and a low risk perception, but experience some barriers to increase their fish consumption. Fish Lovers do not perceive any risk from eating fish and express strong motives and low barriers. Finally, Concerned fish consumers perceive few barriers, and they score relatively moderate on fish consumption motives, but express some doubts with respect to potential risks from eating fish. Profiling the clusters yields opportunities for targeted marketing strategies and product orientation.

show abstract

“…As a rule, food is a product where involvement is low and thus decision making tends to be associated with limited, habitual or routine response behaviour (Blackwell, Miniard, & Engel, 2001;Mahon, Cowan, & McCarthy, 2006). However, the perceived risks associated with making the wrong decision when purchasing seafood makes seafood a product where involvement is higher than with many other food items (Fischer & Frewer, 2009;Foxall, Leek, & Maddock, 1998;Juhl & Poulsen, 2000;Pieniak et al, 2008;Vanhonacker, Pieniak & Verbeke, 2010). The greater the perceived risk, the more involved the consumer becomes in the decision making process, and the more extensive is the search for both personal and non-personal information during evaluation of alternatives (Bansal & Voyer, 2000;Cho & Lee, 2006;Dowling & Staelin, 1994;Gurhan-Canli & Batra, 2004).…”

Section: The Role Of Perceived Risk In Influencing Seafood Consumptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Buying seafood: Understanding barriers to purchase across consumption segments

Birch

Lawley

2012

Food Quality and Preference

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Most consumers have positive attitudes toward seafood and consider it to be an important part of a healthy and balanced diet. However when purchasing seafood, consumers also weigh up various risks which may act as barriers to consumption. In this paper, the findings of an online survey of Australian consumers (n=899) which explored both drivers and barriers to seafood consumption are discussed. The primary focus of this paper is to explore the perceived risks of seafood consumption and how these vary across consumption levels. Perceived risks associated with seafood consumption include functional, social, physical, psychological, and financial risk. With the exceptions of physical and financial risk, perceptions of risk varied across regular, light and very light seafood consumption segments. Lighter fish consumers were more likely to perceive functional risk associated with being less informed and less familiar with fish, experience more difficulties with selecting fish, recognising if fish is fresh, and preparing and serving fish than more regular fish consumers. Regular seafood consumers were less likely than lighter seafood consumers to perceive social risk arising from other members of their household not liking fish. Moreover, regular seafood consumers were less likely to perceive psychological risks associated with unpleasant past experiences or unpleasant sensory qualities, such as not liking the smell of fish and not liking to touch fish. Based on these results strategies for reducing perceived risks as a means of stimulating fish consumption are proposed for further investigation.

show abstract

Cognitive Antecedents of Consumers» Willingness to Purchase Fish Rich in Polyunsaturated Fatty Acids (PUFA)

Cited by 25 publications

References 28 publications

Should we spend more on fish?—How consumer beliefs about fish influence fish and meat expenditure shares

Should we spend more on fish?—How consumer beliefs about fish influence fish and meat expenditure shares

Fish Market Segmentation Based on Consumers' Motives, Barriers and Risk Perception in Belgium

Buying seafood: Understanding barriers to purchase across consumption segments

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About