Xinmeng Yang , Sanne Boesveldt , Elizabeth H. Zandstra
{"title":"嗅觉引物对食物概念心理表征和后续食物选择的影响","authors":"Xinmeng Yang , Sanne Boesveldt , Elizabeth H. Zandstra","doi":"10.1016/j.foodqual.2024.105351","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Previous research suggests that food odors act as a prime and influence food choice outside of awareness. Little is known about how odors prime (healthy) food choices. We hypothesized that odors could activate mental representations of food concepts, interacting with cognitive processes underlying food decision-making. We tested this by examining which concepts (healthy, sensory, or product-specific) are activated by odors and how this impacts subsequent food choices. In a between-subjects design, 112 participants were divided into three conditions: healthy odor (apple or banana), unhealthy odor (chocolate or caramel), and non-odor (control). Participants were exposed to one condition for 5 min and then completed a lexical decision task and a screen-based food choice task. The lexical decision task included four word categories: healthy-related, sensory-related, neutral words, and non-words. Reaction times were recorded and computed for each category. Participants were asked to choose one food they wanted to eat from four (in-)congruent food word options and repeated it four times (one for each odor). Results showed participants responded slower to non-words than other words, and slower to healthy and sensory words than neutral words. However, odor exposure did not influence reaction times, nor did the interaction between odor condition and word category affect reaction times. Participants were more likely to choose unhealthy foods regardless of odor exposure. Thus, ambient sweet odors did not prime food-related information or choice. We recommend additional testing using a broader range of odors and word categories to fully validate the association of an odor with a concept.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":322,"journal":{"name":"Food Quality and Preference","volume":"123 ","pages":"Article 105351"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Impact of olfactory priming on mental representations of food concepts and subsequent food choice\",\"authors\":\"Xinmeng Yang , Sanne Boesveldt , Elizabeth H. Zandstra\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.foodqual.2024.105351\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Previous research suggests that food odors act as a prime and influence food choice outside of awareness. Little is known about how odors prime (healthy) food choices. We hypothesized that odors could activate mental representations of food concepts, interacting with cognitive processes underlying food decision-making. We tested this by examining which concepts (healthy, sensory, or product-specific) are activated by odors and how this impacts subsequent food choices. In a between-subjects design, 112 participants were divided into three conditions: healthy odor (apple or banana), unhealthy odor (chocolate or caramel), and non-odor (control). Participants were exposed to one condition for 5 min and then completed a lexical decision task and a screen-based food choice task. The lexical decision task included four word categories: healthy-related, sensory-related, neutral words, and non-words. Reaction times were recorded and computed for each category. Participants were asked to choose one food they wanted to eat from four (in-)congruent food word options and repeated it four times (one for each odor). Results showed participants responded slower to non-words than other words, and slower to healthy and sensory words than neutral words. However, odor exposure did not influence reaction times, nor did the interaction between odor condition and word category affect reaction times. Participants were more likely to choose unhealthy foods regardless of odor exposure. Thus, ambient sweet odors did not prime food-related information or choice. We recommend additional testing using a broader range of odors and word categories to fully validate the association of an odor with a concept.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":322,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Food Quality and Preference\",\"volume\":\"123 \",\"pages\":\"Article 105351\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-24\",\"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/S0950329324002532\",\"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}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Food Quality and Preference","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0950329324002532","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}
Impact of olfactory priming on mental representations of food concepts and subsequent food choice
Previous research suggests that food odors act as a prime and influence food choice outside of awareness. Little is known about how odors prime (healthy) food choices. We hypothesized that odors could activate mental representations of food concepts, interacting with cognitive processes underlying food decision-making. We tested this by examining which concepts (healthy, sensory, or product-specific) are activated by odors and how this impacts subsequent food choices. In a between-subjects design, 112 participants were divided into three conditions: healthy odor (apple or banana), unhealthy odor (chocolate or caramel), and non-odor (control). Participants were exposed to one condition for 5 min and then completed a lexical decision task and a screen-based food choice task. The lexical decision task included four word categories: healthy-related, sensory-related, neutral words, and non-words. Reaction times were recorded and computed for each category. Participants were asked to choose one food they wanted to eat from four (in-)congruent food word options and repeated it four times (one for each odor). Results showed participants responded slower to non-words than other words, and slower to healthy and sensory words than neutral words. However, odor exposure did not influence reaction times, nor did the interaction between odor condition and word category affect reaction times. Participants were more likely to choose unhealthy foods regardless of odor exposure. Thus, ambient sweet odors did not prime food-related information or choice. We recommend additional testing using a broader range of odors and word categories to fully validate the association of an odor with a concept.
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.