Examining mental shortcuts in consumers use of food package information for purchase decision. Is it a case of health, habit or haste?

IF 4.9 1区 农林科学 Q1 FOOD SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
Toritseju Begho , Kai-Lin Yu
{"title":"Examining mental shortcuts in consumers use of food package information for purchase decision. Is it a case of health, habit or haste?","authors":"Toritseju Begho ,&nbsp;Kai-Lin Yu","doi":"10.1016/j.foodqual.2025.105727","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This study examines how consumers use heuristics in food decision-making. Three research questions motivated the study. What types of food choice heuristics are most commonly used? How does reliance on heuristics vary by consumers' label-reading behaviour? To what extent do attitudes and personal characteristics influence heuristic use? Using a survey-based experiment, 508 Taiwanese participants were presented with five milk product profiles, each designed to trigger a specific heuristic (Take-the-best, Recognition, Emotional or Attribute Substitution). Choices were triangulated with data on label-use behaviour and food-related attitudes. Chi-square tests assessed associations between consumer attitudes and product choices, while multinomial logistic regression predicted drivers of heuristic use. The results show that most consumers do not consistently apply a single decision rule. Only 16.1 % demonstrated behaviour aligned with their stated preferences. Chi-square tests showed that decision patterns were strongly associated with whether participants prioritized health versus price/taste (χ<sup>2</sup> = 39.8, <em>p</em> &lt; .001) and, to a lesser extent, with habitual versus conscious shopping (χ<sup>2</sup> = 16.3, <em>p</em> = .038). Multinomial regression showed that label-readers were over five times more likely to choose emotionally framed options and three times more likely to choose cognitively framed ones, compared to price-driven (Take-the-best) choices. These findings show that price alone does not drive food decisions, even when it represents a clear monetary advantage. The study underscores the bounded rationality of consumers and suggests that label simplification, emotional salience and contextual framing may be more effective than information density in guiding healthier food choices.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":322,"journal":{"name":"Food Quality and Preference","volume":"135 ","pages":"Article 105727"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Food Quality and Preference","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0950329325003027","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"FOOD SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study examines how consumers use heuristics in food decision-making. Three research questions motivated the study. What types of food choice heuristics are most commonly used? How does reliance on heuristics vary by consumers' label-reading behaviour? To what extent do attitudes and personal characteristics influence heuristic use? Using a survey-based experiment, 508 Taiwanese participants were presented with five milk product profiles, each designed to trigger a specific heuristic (Take-the-best, Recognition, Emotional or Attribute Substitution). Choices were triangulated with data on label-use behaviour and food-related attitudes. Chi-square tests assessed associations between consumer attitudes and product choices, while multinomial logistic regression predicted drivers of heuristic use. The results show that most consumers do not consistently apply a single decision rule. Only 16.1 % demonstrated behaviour aligned with their stated preferences. Chi-square tests showed that decision patterns were strongly associated with whether participants prioritized health versus price/taste (χ2 = 39.8, p < .001) and, to a lesser extent, with habitual versus conscious shopping (χ2 = 16.3, p = .038). Multinomial regression showed that label-readers were over five times more likely to choose emotionally framed options and three times more likely to choose cognitively framed ones, compared to price-driven (Take-the-best) choices. These findings show that price alone does not drive food decisions, even when it represents a clear monetary advantage. The study underscores the bounded rationality of consumers and suggests that label simplification, emotional salience and contextual framing may be more effective than information density in guiding healthier food choices.
考察消费者使用食品包装信息进行购买决策的心理捷径。这是健康、习惯还是匆忙的问题?
本研究考察了消费者如何在食品决策中使用启发式。三个研究问题激发了这项研究。哪种类型的食物选择启发式最常用?消费者的标签阅读行为如何改变对启发式的依赖?态度和个人特征在多大程度上影响启发式的使用?在一项基于调查的实验中,508名台湾参与者被展示了五种奶制品的简介,每一种都被设计成触发一个特定的启发式(取最佳、识别、情感或属性替代)。选择与标签使用行为和食品相关态度的数据进行了三角测量。卡方检验评估了消费者态度和产品选择之间的关联,而多项逻辑回归预测了启发式使用的驱动因素。结果表明,大多数消费者不会始终如一地应用单一决策规则。只有16.1%的人的行为与他们陈述的偏好一致。卡方检验显示,决策模式与参与者是否优先考虑健康和价格/口味密切相关(χ2 = 39.8, p < .001),并且在较小程度上与习惯性购物和有意识购物相关(χ2 = 16.3, p = 0.038)。多项回归显示,与价格驱动(选择最好的)的选择相比,标签阅读者选择情感框架选项的可能性高出五倍,选择认知框架选项的可能性高出三倍。这些发现表明,价格本身并不能驱动食品决策,即使它代表着明显的金钱优势。该研究强调了消费者的有限理性,并建议在指导健康食品选择方面,标签简化、情感突出和情境框架可能比信息密度更有效。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Food Quality and Preference
Food Quality and Preference 工程技术-食品科技
CiteScore
10.40
自引率
15.10%
发文量
263
审稿时长
38 days
期刊介绍: Food Quality and Preference is a journal devoted to sensory, consumer and behavioural research in food and non-food products. It publishes original research, critical reviews, and short communications in sensory and consumer science, and sensometrics. In addition, the journal publishes special invited issues on important timely topics and from relevant conferences. These are aimed at bridging the gap between research and application, bringing together authors and readers in consumer and market research, sensory science, sensometrics and sensory evaluation, nutrition and food choice, as well as food research, product development and sensory quality assurance. Submissions to Food Quality and Preference are limited to papers that include some form of human measurement; papers that are limited to physical/chemical measures or the routine application of sensory, consumer or econometric analysis will not be considered unless they specifically make a novel scientific contribution in line with the journal''s coverage as outlined below.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信