Department of Primary Industries & Fisheries
Tools
Accessibility
Access keys <#> | Skip to primary navigation <#nav1> | Skip to content
<#contentanchor> | Skip to footer <#footer> |
Problems viewing this site
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Link to Queensland Government (www.qld.gov.au)
Search
Search
Advanced search »
Global links
Home
|
Site map
| Contact us
|
Help
|
Department of Primary Industries & Fisheries
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Primary navigation
* Business & trade
o Business & trade services
o Business development
o Industry trends
o Trade & export
* Plants
o Moving plants & plant products
o Agvet chemicals & residues
o Health, pests & diseases
o Field crops & pastures
o Fruit & vegetables
o Forestry
o Lifestyle horticulture
o Plant industries services
o Research & development
* Animals
o Identifying, moving & selling livestock
o Agvet chemicals & residues
o Health, pests & diseases
o Animal welfare & ethics
o Beef
o Dairy
o Pigs
o Poultry
o Sheep
o Aquaculture
o Other animals
o Animal industries services
o Research & development
* Fisheries
o Aquaculture
o Commercial fisheries
o Recreational fishing
o Exotic pest fish
o Fisheries services
o Habitats
o Policy & legislation
o Research & development
o Species identification
o Sustainable fishing
* Environment
o Emergency & disaster assistance
o Drought
o Climate
o Environmental pests
o Water & salinity
o Intensive livestock
o Organics
o Policy & legislation
* Biosecurity
o Biosecurity contacts
o Identifying, moving & selling livestock
o Moving plants & plant products
o Agvet chemicals & residues
o Animal welfare & ethics
o Health, pests & diseases
o Environmental pests
o Food safety
* Research
o Strategy & direction
o Research areas
o Case studies
o Scientific publications
o Capabilities
o Research stations & facilities
* Services
o Animal industries services
o Business & trade services
o Fisheries services
o Plant industries services
o Bookshop
o Conference facilities
o Email lists
o Events & sponsorship
o Library
o News
o Newsletters
* About us
o The organisation
o Contact us
o Employment
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Home > Business & trade
>
Drivers of consumer behaviour
Conventional food
January 2003
Summary
* The purchase of conventional food is a low involvement process
performed out of habit and convenience. However, marketing
decisions still involve understanding the complexity of the
interaction between food property factors, personal factors
and purchasing environmental factors.
* Food property factors include physiological characteristics (such
as nutritional effects and safety), plus sensory properties (such
as taste, smell and appearance). Personal factors include
biological aspects (such as health, dietary needs), psychological
concerns (such as ethics and attitudes), and socio-demographics
(including location, education level and family). Purchasing
environmental factors include culture, economics and marketing.
* Of all the demographic variables income is the strongest moderator
of purchasing intentions. Quality is important, however quality
perception is affected by personal factors such as product
experience and education. Situation is important: this includes
product use and physical surroundings. Perceived value is a
strong moderator of behaviour and combines quality, cost, income
constraints, and other personal traits such as attitudes.
* Maslow's hierarchy of needs provides assistance in explaining
purchase behaviour. Satisfaction of some of the lower hierarchy
needs, such as physiological, safety and social needs is often the
prerequisite for the higher order needs. Adding elements that
satisfy higher order needs to foods that are originally designed
to satisfy lower order needs is likely to increase purchases.
* Because food is generally a low involvement purchase item,
consumers tend to process information through a peripheral rather
than central route. Familiar elements serve as a purchase trigger
rather than serious and time-consuming communication messages.
* Retail and situational factors could affect and moderate consumer
purchases irrespective of the attitudes and purchase intentions
already established. Retail factors include crowd density, staff
attitude and training, stock layout/ relocation, impulse
purchasing, time pressure, location, merchandise assortment,
music, lighting and heating, point-of-purchase display, quantity
cues, and store brands.
* Distinctive product characteristics of organic, functional and GM
food entail different consumer purchase drivers thus requiring
different decision-making processes.
Who buys, who doesn't and why
Generic factors
Consumers? normal food purchases are viewed as low-involvement decision
activities. A supermarket trip rarely involves long and complicated
decision processes. Food purchasing is often an unconscious,
instantaneous act that is accompanied by consistent and habitual
purchasing behaviour. However, even with purchases of low involvement
food products, consumers generally go through a decision-making process
before selection is made.
Research studies have discovered certain personality attributes are
strongly correlated with food selection. In one study, undertaken in
Germany, food purchase criteria were measured in four different dimensions:
* Egoistic and hedonistic orientation using criteria of freshness,
flavour, and appearance;
* Egoistic and health orientation using as criteria healthiness, non
genetically produced foods, no preservatives and organically
produced;
* Altruistic orientation using criteria such as environmental
packaging, non genetically produced goods, organically produced,
regionally produced and with a known producer;
* Marketing orientation using criteria of price, country-of-origin,
quality mark, and brand.
(Wirthgen, Kuhnert, Altmann, Demmin &
Wirthgen, 2002)
In comparison, the conceptual model of food choice developed by Furst
(cited in Roininen, 2001) highlights three factors:
* Life course such as a person?s experience;
* Influences including ideals, personal factors, resources, social
framework, and food context;
* Personal systems and strategies for making choices and value
negotiations such as sensory perceptions, monetary considerations,
convenience, health, nutrition, management of relationship and
quality.
While common attributes and criteria for food selection and purchase are
noted across studies, cultural or geographical differences are also
evident. For example, American consumers ranked in order of importance,
taste, cost, nutrition, convenience and weight control expectations.
Taste was considered to be a minimum standard of food acceptance except
for fruit and vegetables. (Glantz, Basil, Maibach, Goldberg & Snyder,
1998). In Japan, consumers showed slightly different concerns. In a
survey quality/freshness was ranked highest followed by taste, price,
convenience, package design and nutrition (Stroppiana & Riethmuller,
2000).
Universal Food Choice Model
One model which groups together various internal and external factors
that have emerged from different disciplines is illustrated in Figure 1.
Figure 1: Modified conceptual model for food purchasing
Figure 1: Modified conceptual model for food purchasing
Source: Adapted from Traill, 1999
The model highlights three simplified dimensions that influence
consumers? food choice decision process: person-related factors,
properties of the food and purchasing environmental factors. These
dimensions influence consumers? decision process in combination or
interaction with each other. For example, a certain culturally
determined diet pattern may affect consumer taste perceptions. Or,
previous satisfactory product experience and immature market
infrastructure may make a consumer tolerant toward negative product
attributes.
Properties of the food
Physiological properties of food such as nutritional effects, food
safety and sensory properties such as taste, smell and appearance affect
individual?s food choice decision processes (Traill, 1999). As
suggested above, there is an interactive effect between the major
factors, as examined in the following sections.
Person-related factors
Traill (1999) describes person-related factors that include lifestyles,
value systems, quality perceptions and environmental consciousness. In
addition, biological factors are included such as specific health
conditions or dietary needs. Examples of these include weight,
cholesterol and food allergies concerns. Also, psychological concerns
are included such as ethics and attitudes to the food production method
such as animal husbandry. Other issues are addressed which include
socio-demographics such as education level and family composition.
Individual factors provide the key to purchase decisions when
environmental or food property factors were perceived to be the same
(Traill, 1999). When a product of universal attributes is sold under a
similar price range and market conditions, personal and individual
factors often become the most influential. Termed another way,
individual factors become the final gatekeeper for food choice and
purchase decision.
Properties of food in interaction with person-related factors
Physical product characteristics are the most important factors for
guiding food choice. Some attributes are more generic such as taste
and price. Other attributes are more product-specific such as meat fat
content (Traill, 1999). Appendix A illustrates the relative importance
consumers place across different countries on various product attributes.
However, consumers don?t purchase foods for single item attributes per
se but for personal or environmental consequences (Traill 1999). For
example, eating non-fattening foods may assist in weight loss or a
ready-to-cook food may save time. These consequences were found to
notably influence product selection. The contributing components may
include security, family values, fun, enjoyment and social recognition
(Traill, 1999). The weight of these values varies across personal
factors and environmental background. An example of different weights
reflected in food selection is illustrated in Appendix B.
Consumers' quality perception also influences food selection process.
The majority of Australian consumers have a preference for high quality
household goods and services and this is also true of food products
(Zeitner, 2000). Since the focal point of many foods, especially
organic, is on quality, this consideration is an imperative for consumer
decision-making. However, the inference of quality is subjective and
prone to distortion by personal variables. These variables include
product experiences, education levels, perceived quality risks and
quality consciousness in addition to situational aspects such as usage
goals, physical surroundings and time pressures (Kyriakopoulos & Ophuis,
1997).
Quality perception alone may not trigger consumers? purchase behaviour.
Perceived value may play a more important role in consumer purchase
decision as it combines with quality perception the factors of cost,
income constraints, and other personal traits such as attitudes (Stokes
cited in Kyriakopoulos & Ophuis, 1997).
Sensory perception with person related factors and environmental
factors
Sensory perception of food attributes is susceptible to personal
differences resulting from the various psychological and marketing
factors. Sensory elements may be linked to factors such as brand names,
labels, texture and colour. These elements can influence and trigger
purchasing behaviour if viewed positively. Positive sensory appearance
may trigger an elevated evaluation of the product, leading to a higher
quality perception and this may ultimately make the product more
desirable for purchase.
Demographics in interaction with food attributes
Among many demographic elements, income-related factors such as budget
constraint may strongly influence and moderate purchase intentions. The
moderation process happens in that once a food?s quality is perceived
the perception is justified against the price before purchasing. For
example, someone who thinks a certain brand offers only supreme quality
food products may consider paying high price premiums attached to the
brand lines.
Further, because customers rarely remember prices, they encode them
as ?expensive? or ?cheap? (Kyriakopoulos & Ophuis, 1997). Thus the
price factor would moderate purchase intention through simplified
encoding into a bimodal perceived price. External cues such as coupons,
private labels, brand name and cents-off offer creates information to
simplify a consumer?s cognitive evaluation of value (Kyriakopoulos &
Ophuis, 1997).
Personal hierarchy of needs in interaction with economic and
cultural factors
In a study undertaken in USA, it was found that food-related price and
convenience concerns were highest among younger consumers and people
with lower incomes (Glantz et al., 1998). Nevertheless, populations in
affluent western cultures are more likely to be driven by higher order
needs having means to make more intelligent food choices.
Figure 2. Maslow?s Hierarchy of Needs Theory assists in
explaining human behaviour.
Figure showing Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs Theory
Source: Kotler, Armstrong, Brown & Adam (1998)
Maslow's hierarchy of needs attempts to explain that individuals have
needs that are satisfied in a sequential way. The lower order
physiological needs of meeting hunger and thirst have to be initially
satisfied. Once satisfied, safety needs are addressed which includes
factors such as security and protection. The process continues through
the hierarchy to higher order needs till a person reaches the
self-actualisation stage.
The implications for marketeers, from a consumer perspective, are that
lower order needs must be met before higher order needs are considered.
Further, as consumers advance through the hierarchy higher order needs
need to be taken into account. In general, in Australia and other
western countries, lower order needs are seen to be largely met and thus
the focus is on attending to higher order needs. For example, someone
trying to make ends meet in developing countries may not spend more
money to support environmental causes. However, those who wish to
satisfy a self-actualisation need through supporting a cause such as
animal welfare in affluent western countries may be willing to pay more
in order to fulfil their ideological ethical needs.
Food producers should not neglect the fact that the satisfaction of some
of the lower hierarchy needs is often the prerequisite for achieving
higher order needs fulfilment. Adding ingredients or attributes which
satisfy higher order needs to the types of food that conventionally
satisfy lower hierarchy needs is likely to attract increased purchases.
Healthy Lifestyle Trends and Personal Factors
A person?s lifestyle is an aggregate of biological, psychological and
socio-demographic factors. Lifestyle trends have a relationship with
food selection and purchase behaviours. Glanz et al. (1998) identified
seven significant clusters from the USA consumer market based on food-
and health-related tendencies and behaviours.
* *Physical Fanatics *(24% of population) - very health-orientated,
don?t smoke or drink and watch weight
* *Active Attractive* (13%) - health-orientated, but in order to
look attractive
* *Tense but Trying* (10%) - healthy in terms of food consumption
but may smoke or drink
* *Decent Dolittles*(24%) - overweight, don?t smoke, drink, exercise
or eat healthily
* *Passively Healthy* (15%) - healthy lifestyle but consumer of a
high-fat diet
* *Hard-living Hedonists* (6%) - smoke, drink, eat poorly but exercise
* *Non-interested Nihilists* (7%) - smoke, drink, eat poorly and
don?t exercise
Table 1 shows the importance of various factors according to cluster type.
Table 1: Factors related to food consumption across healthy
lifestyle clusters
*Lifestyle Sector *
*Taste*
*Nutrition*
*Cost*
*Conven-ience*
*Weight Control*
Physical Fanatics
4.7
4.4
4.1
3.8
4.2
Active Attractives
4.7
3.9
4.0
3.7
3.6
Tense but Trying
4.8
3.9
4.2
3.9
3.5
Decent Dolittles
4.7
3.7
4.2
3.9
3.3
Passively Healthy
4.7
3.9
4.1
3.8
3.4
Hard-living Hedonists
4.6
3.5
4.1
3.7
2.8
Non-interested Nihilists
4.6
3.1
4.1
3.9
2.3
The scale used in the above table was 1= not at all important to 5= very
important.
Source: Glantz et al. 1998
According to the authors of the article, concerns of taste quality were
the most problematic issue for the adoption of a healthy diet (Glanz et
al., 1998).
Purchasing environmental factors
As indicated in Figure 1 cultural, economic and marketing factors affect
consumers? food choice decisions. Culture defines consumer values and
diet patterns. An affluent country with a well-developed marketing
infrastructure offers more food choices and potentially more expensive
value-added foods (Traill, 1998).
Marketing
Labelling
Rather than exerting thinking effort to their food purchase, consumers
use cues such as labels and government agency endorsements to ensure
nutritional value and food safety. Some studies indicate that consumers
usually do not bother to read labels (Gilbert, 1999b). However, the
value of labelling arises from the perception that a food is safe since
it has met the labelling requirement the government imposed. Also,
consumers desire a sense of control over their food purchasing decisions
through comparing labels. Labelling is an effective method of
communicating the existence of alternative food options.
Communications
Consumers? comprehension of messages affects their attitudes toward the
message, which in turn may influence subsequent behaviour (Ajzen cited
in Lepkowska-White, 2001). When consumers are persuaded and their
attitudes are formed, they go through either a central or a peripheral
information processing route (Petty & Caciopo cited in Wansink & Kim, 2001).
Consumers receive information through the central route when they
realise that a discussion topic has a direct influence on them. The
consumer is then motivated to concentrate at a more objective and
logical level. A credible source with factual information can persuade
an attitude change through this route. Controversial food issues, such
as GM food, are more likely to trigger this method of information analysis.
In central route processing, selecting a credible information source is
important. Australian consumers rated the CSIRO and scientists,
followed by consumer organisations and universities, as credible sources
of information (Cormick, 2000).
The peripheral route is used when consumers do not hold any sustainable
interest toward an issue. Using this route, consumers look towards the
environment for cues. In that quest, it triggers attitude change
without critical analysis. As shoppers become more familiar with a food
product, they are more likely to incorporate familiar elements into
their routine shopping trips (Gilbert, 1999a) and familiar elements will
serve as cues. This route is usually undertaken when consumers have
little motivation to evaluate a food product or the information is
either too meticulous or broad (Wansink & Kim, 2001). Since the
majority of food buying behaviour is habitual, many consumers use the
peripheral mode of information processing. Examples include most of
low-price everyday consumer products purchased regularly.
Retail factors
Retail and situational factors could affect and moderate consumer
purchases irrespective of the attitudes and purchase intention already
established.
Shopping stressor has been explained as something occurring during the
shopping activity, which disturbs the mental balance of an individual
(Aylott & Mitchell, 1999). These stressors include aspects such as
parking, poor signage, crowding, trolley manoeuvrability and checkout
queue. Other factors affecting shopping outcomes include staff attitude
and training, stock layout/relocation, impulse purchasing, time
pressure, location, merchandise assortment, music, lighting and heating
(Aylott & Mitchell, 1999). One study measured the significance
of different stressors affecting food-shopping habits. In the
study, queuing and store crowding were viewed as the most stressful
influencers that frustrated shoppers (Aylott & Mitchell, 1999).
Appendix C provides a comprehensive map of these shopping stressors.
Point-of-purchase displays incorporating numeric signs also influences
consumer behaviour. A study conducted in USA revealed that the amount
of food products consumers purchased doubled when told they were given
purchase limits such as 'a limit of 10 per customer' (Baird, 1999). In
another instance, a suggestive selling sign such as 'buy 10 for the
weekend' increased sales from 42-118%. Further, multiple unit pricing
statements such as '3 for $3.00 instead of 1 for $1.00' increased sales
by 35%.
At the core of this perception, the influence of anchoring such as
quantity cue moderated consumer purchase decisions. In order to
simplify the decision-making of shopping trips, consumers create biases,
which allow them to make rapid, effortless decisions (Wansink, Kent &
Hoch, 1998). When promotional signs suggest a number of products, they
trigger consumer questions about what they should purchase. As shoppers
decide on a quantity to purchase, they look toward it as a point of
affirmation (Wansink, Kent & Hoch,1998). For example, a sign that reads
?Buy 10 soups for your pantry? may be interpreted as 10 soups are the
amount that everybody usually buys. However, a little less may be
purchased if the individual is not a large user. This bias indicates
how the number acts as an anchor from which consumers adjust
appropriately (Wansink, Kent & Hoch, 1998).
Other trends indicate a growing demand for store brand products over
national brands or niche food products. Consumers perceive store brands
offering better value with security. In USA, store brands comprise one
out of five products purchased in supermarkets (Nemieht-Ek, 2000). This
trend is now established in Europe and Australia. They offer target
market value and loyalty opportunities.
Consumer psychology and living conditions derived from culture
Japanese consumers are usually cautious of imported foods due to their
sensitivity toward food safety (Stroppiana & Riethmuller, 2000). They
look for foods that are offered in smaller portions because by
frequently purchasing smaller quantities of food they can certify
freshness. Crowded population and small living space per capita
contributes to limited food storage space thus food purchases are
undertaken in small quantities.
A case study, which shows the importance of understanding cross-cultural
values, is seen in Australia?s persimmon exports to Singapore. Consumer
needs were analysed beyond merely understanding price and demand. It
was found with Singaporean consumers in a cultural context that value
for money was perceived to be important. Forty six percent of consumers
specified price as the most important attribute whilst 25% ranked taste
(Bradford, 2000). As a result of a marketing practice based on
perceived value, persimmon exports increased from 98 tones in 1989 to
894 tones in 1995 (Bradford, 2000). Appendix A shows the similarity and
differences in the importance of food purchase drivers among consumers
across a number of countries.
Organic, functional and genetically modified food
It is estimated that the world population will increase 50% by 2050.
This means a consequential increase in the demand for food, fibre,
timber and other natural resources. Currently worldwide agriculture
accounts for 38% of global land area and 66% of water usage (Goklany,
2001). Other studies indicate such an increase in land area is not
possible and it is argued that for sustainable long-term production the
area has to be reduced. Using traditional methods of food production,
croplands in 2050 will need to be increased by 21.5% to accommodate
demand (Goklany, 2001). Innovative production technologies and improved
crop management techniques may assist in offering solutions.
Innovative production and food technology involve organic food
production and the development of functional and GM foods. Consumer
demands and interest are driving the emergence of new types of food such
as these. The demand for organic food has recently increased due to the
backlash against a perception of questionable food production methods.
Examples of these perceptions are in the use of toxic and dangerous
chemicals in farming. This has also been fuelled by the perception of
increased natural health benefits offered by organic food.
Organic, functional and GM food are seen as potentially important
methods of future food production. Forecasters predict the future
growth of the food industry to include these foods. Consumers attach
greater involvement to these purchases than to conventional food items.
This is due to the new and different attributes of these food products,
and as a consequence these foods require more information processing and
evaluation by consumers. Factors that will drive consumer behaviour
toward these foods are therefore likely to be different and require
approaches and strategies unlike those used to produce and market
traditional food products.
Figure 3 illustrates the distinctive positioning of the different food
types.
Figure 3: Consumer perception positioning for innovative and
non-innovative foods
Figure showing consumer perceptions of organic, genetically
modified, functional and conventional foods
Source: Jonas & Beckman cited in von Alvensleben, 2001
Implications
* Consumers are increasingly looking for additional health and
disease prevention functions from food. Products that deliver
these functions are likely to be in increasing demand over the
medium term.
* Health food products that are natural or are upgraded with natural
ingredients are best positioned to take advantage of this trend.
* Functional food products such as healthy snacks and whole meal
solutions are potential growth areas. This is in addition to
other significant market trends such as convenience foods and
those that are easy to prepare.
*
Marketing disease prevention capabilities of fresh and natural
food is a strategy to target changing needs of the consumer
especially with respect to the ageing population of developed
countries.
*
The boundary between genetically modified, functional and
traditional foods is not always clear in consumers understanding.
Further, the evidence suggests that there is two fold division of
food products. The divisions comprise one broad classification of
genetically modified, functional and traditional foods, the other
organic food.
*
Food producers and processors, however, need to take into account
that consumers often have reservations about the accuracy of
health benefit claims of functional foods and may see such benefit
claims as nothing more than a marketing ploy.
*
Regulation and labelling are policy areas that are becoming
increasingly important to ensure consumer confidence is maintained
in the integrity of functional food products.
References
Aylott, R. Mitchell, V. (1999). An exploratory study of grocery shopping
stressors. /British Food Journal/, 101, 683-700.
Baird, J (Editor). (1999). Signs that sell more? Consumer PI Newsletter,
Fall 1999.
http://www.consumerpsychology.com/brandlab/newsletter/fall99/index.htm.
Accessed June 2002.
Baird, J (Editor). (2000). Why people buy products they don?t use.
/Consumer PI Newsletter,/ Spring 2000.
http://www.consumerpsychology.com/brandlab/newsletter/spring00/index.htm. Accessed
June 2002.
Bradford. (2000). Consumer behaviour and fruit quality: supply chain
management in an emerging industry. /Supply Chain Management/, 5, 45.
Cormick, C. (2000). Genetically modified foods and crops/. Ocham?s
Razor, Radio National. /
http://www.abc.net.au/rn/science/ockham/stories/s213390.htm. Accessed
April 2002.
Gilbert, L. (1999a). Shoppers reaching beyond basic nutrition for better
health. http://www.healthfocus.net/articles.htm. Accessed May 2002.
Gilbert, L. (1999b). Vegetarian and vegetarian-aware eating trends.
/Wiley Encyclopedia of Food Science and Technology/. October.
Glanz, K., Basil, M., Maibach, E., Goldberg, J. & Snyder, D. (1998).
Why Americans eat what they do: Taste, nutrition, cost, convenience, and
weight control concerns as influences on food consumption. /Journal of
the American Dietetic Association, 98,/1118-1126.
Goklany, I. M. (2001). The future of food. /Forum for Applied Research
and Public Policy,/ Summer. Knoxville.
Kotler, P., Armstrong, G., Brown, L. & Adam, S. (1998). /Marketing/
(4^th ed.). Prentice Hall.
Kyriakopoulos, K & Ophuis, P. (1997). A pre-purchase model of consumer
choice for biological foodstuff. /Journal of International Food and
Agribusiness Marketing, 8, /37-53.
Lepkowska-White, E. (2001). Comprehension of warnings and resulting
attitudes. /Journal of Consumer Affairs, vol. 35,/ 278-294.
Nemieht-Ek, M. (2000). Private label brands captivate Europe?s
consumers. /FASonline./
http://www.fas.usda.gov/info/agexporter/2000/Jan/private.html. Accessed
June 2002.
Prescott, J., Young, O., O?Neill, L., Yau N., & Stevens, R. (2002).
Cross-cultural differences in motives for food choice: a comparison of
consumers from Japan, Taiwan, Malaysia & New Zealand.
www.dijon.inra.fr/aromes/presentation/Prescott.pdf
. Accessed
June 2002.
Roininen, K. (2001). /Evaluation of food choice behaviour: development
and validation of health and taste attitude scales/. Department of Food
Technology, University of Helsinki.
Sheppard, B., Hartwick, J. & Warshaw, P. (1988). The theory of reasoned
action: A meta-analysis of past research with recommendations for
modifications and future research. /Journal of Consumer Research, 15,/
325-343.
Stroppiana, R. & Riethmuller, P. (2000). Factors Influencing Food
Demand: Survey Evidence from Japan.
www.agribusiness.asn.au/Review/Perspectives/2000StroppianaJapan.htm.
Accessed June 2002.
Traill, B. (1999). Prospects for the future: nutritional, environmental
and sustainable food production considerations- changes in cultural and
consumer habits.http://www.fao.org/docrep/meeting/X2697e.htm. Accessed
June 2002.
Von Alvensleben, R. (2001). Beliefs associated with food production. In:
Frewer, L., Risvik, E., & Schifferstein, H. (Eds.). /Food, People, and
Society- A European Perspective of Consumer?s Food Choices/.
Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg New York, 381-400.
Wansink, B. & Kim, J. (2001) The marketing battle over genetically
modified foods: false assumptions about consumer behaviour. /American
Behavioural Scientist, 44, /1405-1417.
Wansink, B., Kent, R.J. & Hoch, S.J. (1998). Anchoring and adjustment
model of purchase quantity decisions. /Journal of Marketing Research,
/35, 1, 71-81.
Wirthgen, B., Kuhnert, H., Altmann M., Demmin U. & Wirthgen A. (2002).
The importance of region of origin in influencing consumer behaviour for
food products.
http://www.mluri.sari.ac.uk/livestocksystems/witz/wirthgen.htm. Accessed
May 2002.
Zeitner, R. (2000, May 6). Australia organic products 2000.
http://www.fas.usda.gov/gainfiles/200006/25677787.pdf. Accessed May 2002.
Appendices
Appendix A
Table A1: Relative Importance of Product Attributes for
Product Choice in European Countries (in percentage)
*Belgium*
*Spain*
*France*
*UK*
*Italy*
*Netherlands*
*Germany*
Product Quality
25.5
28.1
20.7
19.1
26.6
23.1
30.8
Price
19.6
16.0
16.7
15.6
13.1
14.8
18.8
Brand Name/Reputation
12.7
11.3
12.8
21.9
15.9
13.8
10.7
Freshness
14.2
5.4
10.3
9.4
9.2
13.1
10.3
Guarantee
6.3
13.7
7.8
12.1
7.3
9.0
8.5
Habit
5.9
3.5
6.8
2.0
7.3
4.2
1.7
Safety
4.4
5.1
4.6
2.0
5.3
7.6
4.3
Choice of Several Sizes
1.5
3.9
4.3
4.7
2.4
1.7
2.1
Ease of Use
3.4
2.0
3.6
3.1
2.4
3.1
3.4
Possibility of Making Selections
1.5
2.7
2.5
2.3
2.9
1.7
2.1
Appearance
1.5
2.0
2.8
3.1
1.9
2.1
2.6
Practical Packaging
1.0
2.0
1.8
1.6
2.4
2.4
1.7
Good State of Packaging
1.0
2.3
2.1
2.3
1.4
1.7
1.7
Variety of Brands
1.5
2.0
3.2
0.8
1.9
1.7
1.3
Source: Traill, 1999
Table A2 Relative Importance of Food Choice Factors in
Asia-Pacific Countries
*Japan*
*NZ*
*Taiwan*
*Malaysia*
Price
Sensory appeal
Natural content
Health
Natural content
Price
Health
Natural content
Health
Health
Weight control
Weight control
Ethical concern
Convenience
Convenience
Convenience
Sensory appeal
Weight control
Sensory appeal
Price
Convenience
Natural content
Mood
Sensory appeal
Weight control
Mood
Price
Mood
Mood
Ethical concern
Ethical concern
Ethical concern
Familiarity
Familiarity
Familiarity
Familiarity
Source: Prescott et al., 2002
Appendix B
Lifestyle Segment Profile and Food Selection Factors
*Fast Fun Lovers*
*Controlled Elitists*
*Neo Traditionalists*
*Traditionalists*
*Explorers*
Size/population
26.9%
15.9%
15%
30.4%
11.8%
Identification
Young or middle-aged; urban; average income
25-64 yrs old; good education; high income
Young couples with average income
45-64 yrs old; middle class
Young people; high level of studies
Motivations
Have money to spent it
Civil rights; morality
The family; children comfort
Order; the family moral values
A better world and more social justice
Attitudes
Individualistic and innovators
Conformity
Materialists
Conservatives
Elitists
Priority expenditure
Look and pleasure
Up-market products [financial investments, etc.]
Comfort [the home, etc.
Basic products
Culture and leisure; luxury products
Major interests
Pleasure
Culture
Happiness
The home and family
Culture
Food
Fast innovatory; exotic
Gourmet food; high quality
Modern/ traditional
Traditional; structures; home-made
Quality; variety; facility
Drink
Alcoholic drinks; mineral water; soft drinks
Good wines
Limit oneself
Not to excess
Wide choice of alcoholic drinks
Retail
The most practical [supermarkets shopping centres
Small specialist stores
Modern stores; customer assistance
Supermarkets; local stores
Quality, facility
Marketing
Choice; novelty; attractive packaging
The brand; quality
Confidence in brands
Finding a bargain
Choice; food quality/price relationship
Media
Fun, fashion
Traditional broadcasting
Dreams and utility
TV and entertainment
News; entertainment
Advertising
Cultural stereotypes [American dream, etc.]
Prestige and information
Model family
Simple; personal account
Brand; creativity
Source: Traill, 1999
Appendix C
Significance of Retail-Related Shopping Stressors (Aylott &
Mitchell, 1999)
This diagram shows the many causes of stress during shopping
(* Percentages indicate the influence weight)
Drivers of consumer behaviour- home
Last reviewed 06 April 2005
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright
|
Disclaimer
|
Privacy
|
Link to us
|
Access keys
|
Other languages
© The State of Queensland (Department of Primary Industries and
Fisheries) 1995 - 2007.
Queensland Government