willingness to pay– review

Appetite 143 (2019) 104398

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Appetite journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/appet

The credibility of the effects of functional food products and consumers’ willingness to purchase/willingness to pay– review

T

Brigitta Plasek∗, Ágoston Temesi Department of Food Economics, Faculty of Food Science, Szent István University, 1118, Budapest, Villányi str. 29-43, Hungary

ARTICLE INFO

ABSTRACT

Keywords: Functional food Credibility Healthiness assessment Purchase intention Willingness to pay

The credibility aspect of any food product is important in order to find and keep consumers, which is especially true for functional foods. Market success of these products depends mostly on the credibility of their beneficial effects on health. The aim of this literature review was to identify aspects that make the positive health effect of a functional product credible for consumers. Based on the established connection between purchase intention and credibility, articles have been collected, summarized and restructured. Research papers have been analyzed through a two-step selection process. From 1724 studies, 54 were selected to discuss the above mentioned topics. It has been found that most of the studies focus on the credibility of health claims, while those exploring the connection between different kinds of product attributes and the credibility aspect of functional food products are rare. It is believed that other features can significantly affect this aspect and it is strategically important to know these factors influencing credibility. The literature analysis showed that willingness to purchase functional products is influenced by sensory and non-sensory-characteristics of the product, while willingness to pay is affected for example by consumers' trust in functional foods. On the issue of what influences the credibility of the health benefits of functional products, ambiguous information was found. While one of the most important factors influencing acceptance of functional foods is credibility of information, other researchers’ results show no direct significant relationship between credibility of health claims and willingness to purchase. Credibility of health effect is also influenced by the base product and the carrier ingredient, the source of information, the product design and cultural roots of a country.

1. Introduction Due to their benefits and because of the increasing importance of a healthy lifestyle, functional food products are becoming a part of consumers’ everyday lives (Vecchio, 2016), resulting in an increasing market share. It is estimated that functional food products had a market value of $168 billion in 2013, and can possibly reach $300 billion by 2020 (Santeramo et al., 2017). In spite of the increasing market, the failure rate of food products is high; according to Saguy and Moskowitz (1999), on average, 90% of the new products on the food market fail. This result was verified by Conroy et al. (2009), who found that the failure rate of new products had stayed stable over the previous 30 years (Lesschaeve & Bruwer, 2010). Still, more than 50% of corporate profit comes from products that have been on the shelves for less than five years (Moskowitz, Saguy, Straus, 2009). The market of functional food products is no exception; a large number of the newly introduced products get recalled soon after appearing on the market (Mellentin, 2014, Santeramo et al.,

*

2017). This is probably due to an overreliance on technological innovations (Bleiel, 2010), coupled with an ignorance towards consumers’ needs. Together with finding the reason for the high failure rate of functional food products, it is important to tease out the factors that influence consumers of food products considered healthy in their purchase intent/willingness to pay. The researchers’ opinions differ on certain aspects of the topic, which we will discuss in detail in our research literature analysis. The hypothesis of our review article is that the credibility of the benefits of the products has an effect on willingness to pay/purchase. We wish to bring to light the current state of understanding about the influences that determine the credibility of the benefits of products. Based on the above, our literature review addresses two areas of concern related to functional foods. On the one hand, we set out to define the factors that influence willingness of consumers to purchase/ pay when buying functional food products; on the other hand, we aimed to find out what it is that determines whether the consumer

Corresponding author. E-mail address: [email protected] (B. Plasek).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2019.104398 Received 25 September 2018; Received in revised form 6 August 2019; Accepted 6 August 2019 Available online 08 August 2019 0195-6663/ © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Appetite 143 (2019) 104398

B. Plasek and Á. Temesi

Fig. 1. The search words we used and the process of article selection.

believes in the positive health effect of a certain functional food product.

gap between the two time periods is explained by the research activity on the two issues – willingness to purchase/pay is a more researched topic than credibility. We have to differentiate between willingness to purchase and willingness to pay, so we will later address them separately; finally, we summarize the research on credibility, which we believe influences both willingness to pay and willingness to purchase. The different search engines offer different options to conduct searches. In case of ScienceDirect, Emerald Insight and Wiley Online Library, we were able to apply almost the same method, whereas with Scopus, a somewhat different one. The search process is illustrated through the search for item II on Fig. 1: with the first three search engines, we ran a search for the expression-pairs “»willingness to pay « AND » functional food«” followed by “»WTP « AND » functional food«“. With Scopus, we collapsed the two searches, that is: „»willingness to pay « OR » WTP « AND » functional food«“. We applied this method in all three cases with all four search engines. The initially more than 1500 articles were reduced to the selected 54 in two steps. In the first step we screened out the review-type articles, books, book excerpts, conference papers or other miscellaneous publications. In the second steps, we excluded duplicates, those with a focus on another field of science, or those that did not center on consumer behaviour. At this step we also excluded articles the main question of which did not relate to our review based on their title or abstract, even though they included the search words, or their main research objectives and field of research significantly differ from the questions we examined.

2. Research methodology In our research, we used several search engines to help us summarize the current view of the researcher community on the topics at hand. Although several review articles have summarized the research findings on functional food products (e.g., Kaur & Das, 2011; Siró, Kapolna, Kapolna, & Lugasi, 2008), while others have addressed a specific area of interest related to functional food products (e.g., Ademosun, Oboh, Olasehinde, & Adeoyo, 2018; Bimbo et al., 2017; Kapinova et al., 2017; Reis, Martins, Vasconcelos, Morales, & Ferreira, 2017) in recent years, none has directly focused on examining the relationship between credibility and the willingness to purchase/pay. We have used the search fields of ScienceDirect, Scopus, Emerald Insight and Wiley Online Library. Words used in the searches are shown in Fig. 1; a two-step selection process, also shown in the first figure, resulted in the articles used in our analysis. In our review, we only included articles written in English; articles in other languages as well as articles with a considerably different focus from our theme were excluded. Our article summarizes the findings of 54 studies up until 2017. On the issue of credibility, we went back until 2005, and on the issue of willingness to purchase/pay, until 2010; the

2

Appetite 143 (2019) 104398

B. Plasek and Á. Temesi

3. Results

level of involvement, health claims are important and these consumers look out for such claims. For consumers with a low level of involvement, however, other means of communication (e.g., a picture) is necessary because they do not spend time on reading health claims. We consider it important to discuss willingness to purchase and willingness to pay separately, as purchasing a product is influenced by other factors than is the amount being spent on it. Consequently, these two issues can relate differently also to credibility associated with functional foods.

3.1. Willingness to purchase Functional food products may have several positive effects on consumer health. For it to happen, it is necessary for the consumer to be willing to purchase such products; this brings up the question of what influences consumers in their decision whether to purchase a product or not (Schnettler, 2015). Several studies have attempted to answer this question; their results are listed in Appendix 1. Based on research findings, willingness to purchase functional foods is influenced by level of involvement (Ares, Besio, Giménez, & Deliza, 2010a), consumer lifestyle (Goetzke & Spiller, 2014; Szakály, Szente, Kövér, Polereczki, & Szigeti, 2012), sensory (Kraus, 2015) and nonsensory features of the product, such as the price of the product (Romano, Rosenthal, & Deliza, 2015; Čukelj et al., 2016), the brand of the product (Ares, Giménez, & Deliza, 2010b), the country of origin of the product (Hirogaki, 2013), the health claim displayed on the packaging (Annuziata &Vecchio, 2013; Hirogaki, 2013), the benefits represented by the product (Babicz-Zielinska & Jezewska-Zychowicz, 2017; Rezai, Teng, Shamsudin, Mohamed, & Stanton, 2017; Schnettler et al., 2015), and the perceived fit of carrier/ingredient combination (Krutulyte et al., 2011; Lu, 2015). Ares et al. (2010b) emphasize the importance of non-sensory factors, for example the role of price in consumer decision. A few years later, in 2015, Romano and his colleagues arrived at a similar result related to the price of the product; based on their findings, price has the biggest influence on willingness to purchase. Annunziata and Vecchio (2013) state that price can influence willingness to purchase in two ways: positively, if consumers experience an increase in the quality of the product, or negatively, if we consider the bigger material burden. As opposed to the findings of the two previously mentioned studies, a further result of their research is that from among the factors they investigated, willingness to purchase was the least influenced by price. Numerous studies have investigated the effect of the carrier/ingredient combination on willingness to purchase. Based on the findings of Annunziata and Vecchio (2013), carrier is the most important when choosing a product; in their study, consumers ascribed a bigger benefit to yogurt than to orange juice or a biscuit. In this aspect, the study of Lu (2015) shows that different carrier products result in different willingness to purchase, which gets stronger as the consumer attributes a better perceived fit to the carrier/ingredient combination. The study of Krutulyte et al. (2011) also confirmed the importance of the carrier/ ingredient combination with the addition that, according to them, a combination that has been on the market for a longer time and thus consumers can be familiar with results in a higher willingness to purchase. Consumers’ prior knowledge, however, can greatly influence not only willingness to purchase, but also willingness to pay, which we will discuss later. It is important to mention the role of health claims when discussing willingness to purchase. According to EFSA, “A health claim is any statement on labels, advertising or other marketing products that health benefits can result from consuming a given food, for instance that a food can help reinforce the body's natural defences or enhance learning ability.” (European Food Safety Authority, 2017). Hirogaki (2013) found health claims necessary as they greatly influence consumers; Gineikiene, Kiudyte, and Degutis (2017), however, maintain that certain groups of consumers tend to discount such messages. A further finding of Gineikiene et al. (2017) is that consumer skepticism towards health claims does not directly lower willingness to purchase. In their research, Ares et al. (2010a) compared level of involvement with willingness to purchase, and found that for consumers with a high

3.2. Willingness to pay Learning about consumers’ willingness to pay is important to manufacturers of new products, as it helps them estimate the amount of profit they can expect from selling their product (Moro, Veneziani, Sckokai, & Castellari, 2015). In recent years, willingness to pay has been investigated mostly through methods of experimental auction (e.g., Pappalardo et al., 2016; Vecchio, Van Loo, & Annunziata, 2016); nevertheless, other methods also exist (e.g., contingent valuation method – Romano, Finco, Rosenthal, Finco, & Deliza, 2016, choice experiment – Zaikin & McCluskey, 2013, Moro et al., 2015). Appendix 2 lists the main claims of the analyzed articles. Based on the results, willingness to pay for functional foods may be influenced by health claim (Vecchio et al., 2016), demographic variables (Romano et al., 2016), trust in functional foods and in their production technology (Roosen et al., 2015), prior knowledge about product/ingredient (Ahn, Bae, & Nayga, 2016), and perceived fit of carrier/ingredient combination (Bruschi, Teuber, & Dolgopolova, 2015; Moro et al., 2015; Pappalardo & Lusk, 2016). Some of the studies also quantified the differences between features, which we have collected. In their study, Lawless et al. (2012) examined the effect of the procedural order of the auction on willingness to pay. Their results show that willingness to pay was higher when participants first tasted the product and then were informed about the potential health statement rather than the other way round (two sample t-test; mean willingness to pay: 4.01; 3.56) (Lawless et al., 2012, p. 380). The research of Moro et al. (2015) demonstrates the difference in willingness to pay for the product they examined (catechin-enriched yogurt) between groups created along consumer characteristics. A prominent result of theirs is an identified higher willingness to pay in the 45–64 age group (0.46–0.48 €/jar). They also emphasize the effect of lifestyle: there is a higher willingness to pay in case of those who are trying to lose weight or pay attention to their weight (0.44–0.40 €/jar), work out more than three times a week (0.61 €/jar) and those who do not smoke (0.40 €/jar) (Moro et al., 2015, p. 253–254). In their research, Vecchio et al. (2016) examined the effect of information on willingness to pay for conventional, functional and bio products. According to their results, additional information led to the biggest increase in willingness to pay in case of functional food products (0.49 €); for bio products, this figure was only 0.11 €, and with conventional products, willingness to pay decreased (Vecchio et al., 2016, p. 373). 3.2.1. The effect of information provided to the consumer on willingness to pay Several scholars have examined the effect of information on willingness to pay. Some of the results suggest that appropriately displayed (Oliviera et al., 2016) and communicated messages can increase willingness to pay (Hellyer, Fraser, & Haddock-Fraser, 2012; Marette, Roosen, Blanchemanche, & Feinblatt-Mélèze, 2010; Teuber, Dolgopolova, & Nordström, 2016). Marette et al. (2010) found that different pieces of information had an effect on consumers’ decisions: displaying a message related to reducing the cholesterol level

3

Appetite 143 (2019) 104398

B. Plasek and Á. Temesi

imperative to examine existing information on credibility, on the influences that drive consumers’ perceptions on the healthfulness of a product. One of the most difficult tasks of manufacturers and sellers is the marketing communication of functional foods, since their stated effects are not immediately seen. Thus, consumers cannot experience the positive effects before purchasing and consuming the product (Hirogaki, 2013), or sometimes not even after consuming it (Hellyer, 2012). What is more, besides regarding the health effects of the product with skepticism, consumers may even associate possibly harmful effects with consuming the product (Ravoniarison, 2017). Credibility has an undeniable effect on willingness to purchase; Labrecque, Doyon, Bellavance, and Kolodinsky (2006) maintain that it is one of the most important factors in accepting functional foods. A significant part of consumers do not purchase a certain functional food – see the case of cholesterol reducing oils (Bradenburger & Birringer, 2016; Nielsen, 2005)- because they do not believe that these can really help achieve the positive effect promised by the manufacturers through the health claims. So the question arises, what is it that consumers are going to believe and that will make them consume the given product even long term? We examined credibility of functional foods from several aspects. First, we attempted to find the sources consumers gain information from about a certain product or ingredient, and also the sources that are considered credible as far as the health benefits of the product. On the other hand, we can examine the factors that influence consumers in assessing the healthfulness of the product and its positive effects on health when meeting the product. Based on which features of the product will consumers think that it is healthy and has health benefits; what influences them in actually believing it? Several factors can influence the assessment of the healthfulness of a product, for example product packaging shape (van Ooijen, Fransen, Verlegh, & Smit, 2017). At the same time, when examining research on credibility related to functional foods, we mostly find information on different health claims: their effect on the acceptance and assessment of healthfulness of a product (Chrysochou & Grunert, 2014; Van Kleef, van Trijp, & Luning, 2005), how credible they are, and in what form they are credible for consumers (Grunert et al., 2009; Hoefkens & Verbeke, 2013; Masson, Debucquet, Fischler, & Merdji, 2016). For this reason, we address health claims separately. Appendices 3a-3c list the findings of the analyzed articles.

significantly and positively influenced willingness to pay, whereas information on potential risks was given less attention and such information did not significantly increase willingness to pay in every case. Hellyer et al. (2012) assert that displaying a health claim on the product increases willingness to pay, especially for those who do not have prior knowledge about the ingredients. Properly displayed and communicated health-related information results in a significant increase in willingness to pay extra for functional foods, but this is not the case in every food category. For example, the study of Vecchio et al. (2016) on bio food products, which also possess health benefits, did not show the effect of health claims on willingness to pay to such an extent. It is important to note that providing information may backfire. If consumers have less trust in a certain technological process or development, we may obtain reversed results, that is, displaying information (e.g., product manufactured with the help of nanotechnology) may lower willingness to pay, or may even result in the consumer refusing the product (Roosen et al., 2015). 3.2.2. Differences in experimental auction when examining willingness to pay In the articles we analyzed, experimental auction is the most widespread method used to measure willingness to pay. It helps us determine consumers' willingness to pay in a semi-real market environment. The auction is conducted with real products and real money, where participants’ attention is directed to the evaluation of the product (Lusk & Shogren, 2007). It is a non-hypothetical method. Researchers have used several methods of experimental auction to determine willingness to pay; one difference in their implementations is whether it is important for the consumer to sample food during the auction. According to the findings of Lawless et al. (2012), consumers’ willingness to pay is stronger if they have the opportunity to taste the product before having to decide how much they would pay for it. Tasting has a similar importance for Teuber et al. (2016), since, as has been verified by numerous sources (e.g., Kraus, 2015), their results confirm that consumers insist on good taste. No matter the positive health effect of the product, if consumers do not like the taste, they are not going to buy it again. Hellyer et al. (2012), however, assign less importance to tasting. The three-round auction they conducted asserted that nutrition and health claims had the biggest effect on changing the bid price, whereas tasting the product led to a smaller change, its effect was less significant than that of the health claim.

3.3.1. The role of the utilized communication spaces, communicators in credibility When choosing communicators and advertising spaces, companies benefit from knowing which sources of information consumers trust. Consumers of functional foods consider a dietician a fairly credible source of information but trust food companies less (Patch, Tapsell, & Williams, 2005). Information about the product found on social media is considered the least credible, whereas promotions in health magazines are considered more credible (Strijbos et al., 2016). The person featured in the advertisement for functional food also has an effect on consumers. Dutch consumers regard celebrities as the least credible to popularize health claims, and the “Dutch gastro-intestinal association”, the most reliable (Strijbos et al., 2016). Build has a similarly significant role. The research of Melbye, Hansen, and Onozaka (2015) found that featuring a person with a lean figure in an advertisement for a functional sport drink made the positive effects of the product more credible for consumers, as this build is considered healthy and more energetic, to which consumption of the product may have also contributed. All in all, it is important to choose the communicators in a way that

3.2.3. The effect of health claims on willingness to pay Various health claims displayed on the packaging of a functional food product are a common means of communication to illustrate the benefits of the product. Their effect on willingness to pay has been investigated through the method of experimental auction. Research shows that these claims increase willingness to pay (Hellyer et al., 2012; Vecchio et al., 2016; Zaikin & McCluskey, 2013). Vecchio et al. (2016) state that health claims increase the value perceived by consumers, thus increasing willingness to pay for functional yogurt. Zaikin and McCluskey (2013) concluded that messages relaying the positive effects of antioxidants had a positive and significant effect on consumer choice. 3.3. Credibility and functional food products Consumers' beliefs related to functional food products and their skepticism towards the product influence willingness to purchase/pay, as well as the general acceptance of the product, therefore it is

4

Appetite 143 (2019) 104398

B. Plasek and Á. Temesi

consumers are aware that credibility has a major role in the marketing communication of any food product.

Credibility is of strategic importance in marketing communication. It has been a well-known fact that an important question when testing a new product concept is whether benefits of the product are credible for consumers (Page & Rosenbaum, 1992; Peng & Finn, 2010; Wind, 1973). In spite of the strategic importance of credibility in the acceptance of a product, to our knowledge only few studies have examined its relationship to willingness to purchase. Several factors influence willingness to purchase/pay for functional foods, one of which is credibility. We have found opposite results on the relationship between them. Labrecque et al. (2006) state that one of the most important factors influencing acceptance of functional foods is credibility of information. Following in the footsteps of Van Kleef et al. (2005), Strijbos et al. (2016) concluded that credibility of a health claim played an important role in willingness to purchase. In spite of it, Küster and Vila (2017)'s results show no direct significant relationship between credibility of health claims and willingness to purchase. It is of vital importance to determine the effect of credibility of health claims on willingness to purchase. It is not only health claims that try to convince consumers of the health benefits of functional foods. Further research is needed to expand our limited knowledge and explore deeper the factors that influence the credibility of functional foods. According to our current understanding, assessment of the healthfulness of a product, – that is, based on what the consumer will believe in the health benefits of the product – is influenced by, apart from health claims, the carrier itself (Annunziata & Vecchio, 2011; Lalor, Kennedy, & Wall, 2011; Singer, Williams, Ridges, Murray, & McMahon, 2006), the source of information (Patch et al., 2005; Melbye et al., 2015; Strijbos et al., 2016), the product design (Oliveira et al., 2016; Orquin, 2014), and the cultural roots of the specific country (Dolgopolova, Teuber, & Bruschi, 2015). A parallel can be drawn between credibility and willingness to purchase in the sense that both are greatly influenced by the base product. We give importance to comparing the collected qualitative factors. Although studies that do not only examine the effects of some factors but also compare the extent of their effects on willingness to pay exist (e.g. Lawless et al., 2012; Moro et al., 2015; Vecchio et al., 2016), we consider it important to compare the significance of the other factors as well. According to the results, it can be seen that while working on the marketing strategy and product development, stakeholders should take the credibility of the health effects of functional food products seriously, as it will affect consumers’ willingness to purchase and pay.

3.3.2. Credibility of health claims Food manufacturers have the option to communicate the positive effects of functional foods to consumers with the help of health claims. One type of health claims is claims related to disease prevention, the credibility of which is debated among researchers. Van Kleef (2005) states that consumers prefer product concepts that emphasize the effect of reducing the risk of diseases. In contrast, Verbeke, Scholderer, and Lähteenmäki (2009) maintain that these kinds of claims are much less credible than nutritional and health claims. According to the research of Hoefkens and Verbeke (2013), credibility of products with an effect of preventing diseases is the lowest, and this leads to the lowest willingness to pay. 3.3.3. Assessing the healthfulness of a product Health claims play an important role in functional food-related communication, but other factors also influence the assessment of the healthfulness of a product. Grunert (2017) mentions the following as possible tools to communicate the healthfulness of a product: nutritional claims, information on method of manufacturing and farming (e.g. bio), possibly the brand of the company, or pictures and logos suggesting healthfulness. The research of Chrysochou és Grunert (2014) examined the factors that influence the assessment of healthfulness of a product, and in turn how much it influences willingness to purchase. Their results show an effect of health claims on the assessment of a product; nevertheless, whether a consumer purchases a product or not is independent of it. Based on their results, the assessment of healthfulness and willingness to purchase are most influenced by the displayed health-related pictures/figures. Orquin (2014) came to the same conclusion, he asserts that assessment of the healthfulness of a product is not determined by nutrition and health claims. 4. Conclusion and future perspectives The aim of our research literature review was to gauge our current state of understanding about the credibility of functional foods and to find the relationship between willingness to purchase/pay and credibility. In recent years, several studies have investigated consumers’ willingness to pay for these products, but only few of them (BabiczZielinska & Jezewska-Zychowicz, 2017; Gineikiene et al., 2017; Rezai et al., 2014, 2017) hint at the presence of a relationship. According to our research literature analysis, willingness to purchase is influenced by level of involvement (Ares et al., 2010a), the lifestyle of the consumer (Goetzke & Spiller, 2014; Szakály et al., 2012), the sensory (Kraus, 2015) and non-sensory features of the product, such as its price (Romano et al., 2015; Čukelj et al., 2016) and brand (Ares et al., 2010b), health claims on the packaging (Annunziata & Vecchio, 2013; Hirogaki, 2013), the benefits of the product (Babicz-Zielinska & Jezewska-Zychowicz, 2017; Rezai et al., 2017; Schnettler et al., 2015) and the perceived fit of the carrier/ingredient combination (Krutulyte et al., 2011; Lu, 2015). There is an overlap between the factors influencing willingness to purchase and willingness to pay. Health claims (Vecchio et al., 2016) and the relationship between carrier/ingredient (Bruschi et al., 2015; Moro et al., 2015; Pappalardo & Lusk, 2016) also influence willingness to pay. It is further influenced by consumers' trust in functional foods and their manufacturing techniques (Roosen et al., 2015) and by consumers’ prior knowledge (Ahn et al., 2016). Himmelsbach, Alleen and Francas (2014) maintain that never before did consumers have so much information about food products and healthy diets. Consumers screen this information, so the question remains, what influences the assessment of the healthfulness of a product.

4.1. Limitations There are some limitations that must be mentioned to make it clear that some other factors affecting credibility, willingness to purchase and willingness to pay might exist. Firstly, we worked only with four search engines; other engines may give us other articles too, which were not included in this review. Secondly, this review works mostly with the qualitative aspect of the analyzed articles and not with the quantitative side of them. This is due to the reason that we only wanted to find, identify, collect and summarize the factors which affect the credibility aspect of the health benefits of functional food products. Lastly, the heterogeneity of the previous studies included in this review also leads to a limitation. The multitude of countries, methodologies, and types of sampling might yield different results. Funding source The Project is supported by the European Union and co-financed by the European Social Fund (grant agreement no. EFOP-3.6.3-VEKOP-162017-00005).

5

Appetite 143 (2019) 104398

B. Plasek and Á. Temesi

Appendix A. Supplementary data Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2019.104398. Appendices Appendix 1

Factors influencing willingness to purchase functional food products Source

Year

Country

Method

Sample size

Ares et al.

2010a

Uruguay

Conjoint analysis

107

Ares et al.

2010b

Uruguay

Choice-based conjoint Survey

103

Krutulyte et al. 2011

Denmark

Dean et al.

2012

P&P Survey

2385

Szakály et al.

2012

Finland, UK, Germany, Italy Hungary

Questionnairebased survey

1000

Annunziata & Vecchio

2013

Italy

600

Hirogaki

2013

Japan

Goetzke & Spiller

2014

Germany

Questionnaire Conjoint analysis Survey Choice-based conjoint Online survey AIO

Rezai et al.

2014

Malaysia

Questionnairebased survey

2004

Chile

Questionnairebased survey

400

Schnettler et al. 2015

959

265 500

Kraus

2015

Poland

Questionnairebased survey

200

Lu

2015

Canada

Romano et al.

2015

Brazil

62 + 93 (phase 1 + 2) 150

Siegrist et al.

2015

Germany, China

Questionnairebased survey Survey Conjoint analysis Online survey

Čukelj et al.

2016

Croatia

Onlinequestionnaire

1035

Hung et al.

2016

Belgium, the Netherlands, Italy, Germany

Onlinequestionnaire

2057

Gineikiene et al. 2017

Lithuania

Survey

295

BabiczZielinska & JezewskaZychowicz Rezai et al.

2017

Poland

Questionnairebased survey

1002

2017

Malaysia

2004

Küster & Vila

2017

Spain

Personally administered questionnaires Questionnaire

502 + 443

300

Major findings

level of involvement has a positive effect on willingness to purchase • high presence of antioxidants results in a stronger willingness to purchase only if the level of • the involvement is high a low level of involvement, the colour of the packaging and the picture featured on the • atproduct had an influence on willingness to purchase factors of the product (e.g., price, brand and health claim) also play an • non-sensory important role in willingness to purchase fit of the carrier-ingredient combination strongly influences willingness to purchase • perceived to purchase is higher for product combinations that have been on the market for a • willingness longer time, so consumers are more familiar with them perceived relevance affects willingness to buy products which contain a health claim • the effect is much stronger when the health risk is relevant for the consumer • this grouping consumers based on lifestyle, rational consumers of food may be the primary • when target market of functional foods consumers also display a high willingness to purchase functional foods • conservative of functional foods is most influenced by the health claim and the base product • acceptance carrying the functional ingredient consumer is more inclined to accept the product if it has a claim related to prevention • the and purchasing a product is strongly influenced by the health claim and the • choosing country of origin of the product

organic and functional foods are determined by different lifestyles • purchasing passive lifestyle favors the purchase of functional foods, whereas an active lifestyle favors the • apurchase of organic products with the biggest influence on the willingness to purchase synthetic functional foods: • factors perceived benefits, attitude, and subjective norms success of such functional foods largely hinges on the appropriate communication of health • the benefits majority of those surveyed (~60%) are inclined to buy functional foods that lower the • The risks of diseases or improve bodily functions; a quarter of them (~25%) are less inclined to

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

buy such products, and a minority (~14%) is inclined to buy functional foods that improve bodily functions an important role of the information regarding the functionality of the product consumers are not willing to forgo taste and the joy of eating, they would like a healthy, safe and fresh product the perceived fit of carrier and ingredient is a major factor in the decision to purchase consumers' nutrition knowledge contributes to a higher willingness to purchase functional foods willingness to purchase is most influenced by the price, followed by the health claim about the antioxidants present in the product, if there is an additional sentence that explains why it is beneficial for a product to be rich in antioxidants Chinese consumers show a stronger willingness to purchase than the Germans those with a stronger motivation for health and those with a higher trust in the food industry showed a stronger willingness to purchase functional foods in both countries than the less motivated and those with a lower trust in the food industry it is more characteristic of women and the elderly to be open to functional cookies price has a strong influence on willingness to purchase the majority of those surveyed (60%) think that detailed information about the ingredients and the nutritional value of the cookie is necessary when making a decision about purchase Factors associated positively with intent to purchase: attitude; natural over chemical additives; perceived harmfulness of chemical additives; the importance of risk; the level of education and general health interest of the survey-taker, and the frequency of consumption of processed meat products the skepticism of the consumer does not directly affect willingness to purchase functional, organic, and conventional foods consumers with a high health awareness may disregard messages communicating the health benefits of functional foods and show a stronger willingness to purchase bio products purchase is mostly influenced by the positive health effects and the benefits of the product health expectations and trust in functional foods are of primary importance when choosing the products

to purchase natural functional foods is most influenced by the perceived benefits • willingness and perceived barriers is no significant relationship between the credibility of the health claim or the • there perceived healthfulness of the product and willingness to purchase but there is between consumer attitudes and willingness to purchase

6

Appetite 143 (2019) 104398

B. Plasek and Á. Temesi

Appendix 2

Research on willingness to pay for functional food products Source

Year

Country

Method

Sample size

Marette et al.

2010

France

Experiment (BDM; BMS)

107

Lawless et al.

2012

USA

Experimental auctions

47

Hellyer et al.

2012

UK

Experimental auctions

138

Zaikin & McCluskey

2013

Uzbekistan

Consumer surveys

400

Bruschi et al.

2015

Russia

Focus groups, experimental auctions

30 + 207

Roosen et al.

2015

Online survey

615 + 750

Moro et al.

2015

Canada, Germany Italy

Choice experiment

600

Vecchio et al.

2016

Italy

Experimental auctions -Vickrey fifth-price sealed-bid mechanism

100

Furno et al.

2016

Italy

Experimental auction

190

Pappalardo & Lusk Romano et al.

2016

Italy

156

2016

Brazil

Experimental auction - Vickrey auction Contingent Valuation Method

Teuber et al.

2016

Germany

Experimental auctions

131

Ahn, Bae & Nayga

2016

Korea

Choice experiment

40

Main findings

cholesterol reduction effect of the product (when properly communicated) has a • the positive effect on willingness to pay willingness to pay can be obtained if the consumer first tastes the product • aandstronger then learns about the health effects of it than the other way round prior knowledge about the effects of the product can be detected in • consumers' willingness to pay: with well-informed consumers, extra information results in a

• • • • • • • • • • • •

454

• • • • •

smaller increase in willingness to pay than with those who have no knowledge about the benefits of the ingredient information about the positive health effects of antioxidants has a positive and significant effect on willingness to pay both consumers' prior health information and prior knowledge on antioxidants has an effect on willingness to pay among the young, there is openness towards functional foods in spite of the skepticism characteristic of the area the base product greatly influences acceptance of the product and willingness to pay increase in consumer trust towards nanotechnology leads to an increase in willingness to pay, even if new information is communicated about the technology adding an ingredient familiar to consumers (probiotic) results in lower willingness to pay than adding a lesser-known ingredient (catechin- 42% price premium, double than willingness to pay in case of the probiotic) in case of functional yogurt, a health claim increases the value perceived by the consumer and therefore also the willingness to pay, whereas it is less so in case of bio products examining willingness to pay in hypothetical and non-hypothetical circumstances demographic variables have a bigger effect on willingness to pay in the hypothetical situation “statistically significant bias between hypothetical and real bids” (p.15) in general, consumers assign a greater utility to functional foods, thus their willingness to pay is stronger pomegranates cannot be considered very widespread; in spite of its low consumption level, 81.5% of the participants are willing to pay more for juice made from it than for a more traditional juice consumers with a higher income are willing to pay more consumers do not want to give up on delicious taste in return for a healthy product bread with functional features will only succeed on the market if its taste is good for this reason, it is important for consumers to be able to taste food in the experimental auction, thus a more precise, realistic willingness to pay can be obtained wrong information or false beliefs about enriched products greatly distort consumers' willingness to pay and impede an increase in market share

Appendix 3a

Research on the credibility of functional food products - Source of information Source

Year

Country

Method

Sample size

Patch, Tapsell, & Williams Melbye et al.

2005

Australia

Focus group interviews

42

2015

Norway

100

Lee et al.

2015

South Korea

Experimental 2 × 2 betweensubjects factorial design Survey

984

Strijbos et al.

2016

The Netherlands

Questionnaire

1010

Main findings consider dietitians as credible sources of information, and trust food companies • consumers and scientists to a lesser extent consider the health benefits of a product more credible if they are commu• consumers nicated through a person whose build suggests health (sportier, leaner) credibility is low, then consumers do not trust the information and consider it • iflesssource useful gastro-intestinal association, as well as health magazines are credible sources • Dutch of consumption, price, gender and age do not influence credibility related to the • frequency positive effects of functional foods, but education does the functional ingredient makes the health claim more credible than omitting • mentioning the ingredient from the statement

7

Appetite 143 (2019) 104398

B. Plasek and Á. Temesi

Appendix 3b

Research on the credibility of functional food products - Credibility related to functional foods from different aspects Source

Year

Labrecque et al. 2006

Country

Method

Sample size

Survey

611

Survey

149

Eye tracking test, questionnaire Questionnaire-based survey Survey

60

Singer et al.

2006

French Canada, USA, France Australia

Orquin & Scholderer Lalor, Kennedy & Wall Annunziata & Vecchio Orquin

2011

Denmark

2011

Ireland

2011

Italy

2014

Denmark

Online study (Brunswik lens model)

1329

Kljusuric et al.

2015

Croatia

687

Dolgopolova et al. Oliveira et al.

2015 2016

Germany, Russia Brazil

Questionnaire based survey Focus groups

Shan et al.

2017

Ireland

665 400

59

eye-tracking, change 60 detection Cross-sectional survey

486

Main findings two most important factors influencing the acceptance of functional foods: health and • the product-related benefits and credibility of information carrier greatly influences consumers' belief in health claims • the can make better sense of and believe statements more if health claims are displayed on • consumers packaging (briefly in the front, detailed at the back) only piece of information that consumers use as a health cue is the nutrition label but they • the only pay limited attention to reading it of „nutrition knowledge” does not influence credibility of statements • level claims are more credible on yogurts and breakfast cereals than on pasta or chocolate • health effect of functional foods is much more credible in case of products considered healthier in the • the first place-e.g., yogurt consider products that they are familiar with healthier than those that they are not • consumers familiar with has a bigger role in judging healthfulness than the whole packaging design • brand labels, nutrition and health claims: “do not reflect the healthfulness of foods”(p.278.) • organic • consumers do not trust the information displayed on the packaging towards health protecting food products is common in both examined countries, but it • suspicion has much deeper cultural roots for Russians

•

consumer associations with the healthfulness of products are not guided by the functionality of the product, but by graphic elements, according to which graphic design may be the most important in judging healthfulness consumers are not convinced that consuming enriched processed meat products has any benefits for them

Appendix 3c

rResearch on the credibility of functional food products - Health claims and credibility Source

Year

Country

Method

Sample size

Van Kleef et al.

2005

The Netherlands

Reanalyzed data (mini-concepts)

50

Main findings

to try a new functional food is influenced by three factors: • intention attractiveness of the product, perception of the credibility, and uniqueness of the product

prefer product concepts that mainly emphasize features related to • consumers reducing the risk of diseases is a small difference between the credibility of nutritional claims and • there that of health claims; disease reduction claims are the least credible of the

Verbeke et al. 2009

Belgium

Questionnaire based survey

341

Grunert et al. 2009

Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, Sweden

Online survey

4612

2013

Belgium

Consumer survey

341

2016

France

Individual semi-structured interviews; focus groups; questionnaire Questionnaire

31 + 58+1000

Hoefkens & Verbeke Masson et al.

Küster & Vila 2017

Spain

three types of claims

consumer groups of approximately equal size: one thinks that longer, • two information-rich claims that give a full picture of active components are

• • •

300

better; the other thinks shorter claims that only contain health benefits are better credibility of the benefits and intention to purchase is the lowest for products that display messages on disease preventive effects certain types of claims are much more comprehensible and credible than others (e.g., it is more credible that yogurt has a positive effect on bones than it has on skin) the credibility of a health claim has a significant role in assessing the healthfulness of a product and in consumer attitude towards the product

Ares, G., Giménez, A., & Deliza, R. (2010b). Influence of three non-sensory factors on consumer choice of functional yogurts over regular ones. Food Quality and Preference, 21(4), 361–367. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2009.09.002. Babicz-Zielinska, E., & Jezewska-Zychowicz, M. (2017). Conceptual model of consumer's willingness to eat functional foods. Roczniki Panstwowego Zakladu Higieny, 68(1), 33–41. Bimbo, F., Bonanno, A., Nocella, G., Viscecchia, R., Nardone, G., De Devitiis, B., et al. (2017). Consumers' acceptance and preferences for nutrition-modified and functional dairy products: A systematic review. Appetite, 113, 141–154. https://doi.org/10. 1016/j.appet.2017.02.031. Bleiel, J. (2010). Functional foods from the perspective of the consumer: How to make it a success? International Dairy Journal, 20(4), 303–306. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. idairyj.2009.11.009. Brandenburger, S., & Birringer, M. (2015). European health claims for small and mediumsized companies–Utopian dream or future reality? Functional Foods in Health and Disease, 5(2), 44–56. https://doi.org/10.31989/ffhd.v5i2.170. Bruschi, V., Teuber, R., & Dolgopolova, I. (2015). Acceptance and willingness to pay for health-enhancing bakery products–Empirical evidence for young urban Russian consumers. Food Quality and Preference, 46, 79–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. foodqual.2015.07.008. Chrysochou, P., & Grunert, K. G. (2014). Health-related ad information and health

References Ademosun, A. O., Oboh, G., Olasehinde, T. A., & Adeoyo, O. O. (2018). From folk medicine to functional food: A review on the bioactive components and pharmacological properties of citrus peels. Oriental Pharmacy and Experimental Medicine, 1–12. https:// doi.org/10.1007/s13596-017-0292-8. Ahn, B. I., Bae, M. S., & Nayga, R. M. (2016). Information effects on consumers' preferences and willingness to pay for a functional food product: The case of red ginseng concentrate. Asian Economic Journal, 30(2), 197–219. https://doi.org/10.1111/asej. 12090. Annunziata, A., & Vecchio, R. (2011). Functional foods development in the european market: A consumer perspective. Journal of Functional Foods, 3(3), 223–228. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.jff.2011.03.011. Annunziata, A., & Vecchio, R. (2013). Consumer perception of functional foods: A conjoint analysis with probiotics. Food Quality and Preference, 28(1), 348–355. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2012.10.009. Ares, G., Besio, M., Giménez, A., & Deliza, R. (2010a). Relationship between involvement and functional milk desserts intention to purchase. Influence on attitude towards packaging characteristics. Appetite, 55(2), 298–304. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet. 2010.06.016.

8

Appetite 143 (2019) 104398

B. Plasek and Á. Temesi motivation effects on product evaluations. Journal of Business Research, 67(6), 1209–1217. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2013.05.001. Conroy, P., Ash, A., & Kutila, D. (2009). Consumer-centric innovation. A Deloitte LLC report. Čukelj, N., Putnik, P., Novotni, D., Ajredini, S., Voučko, B., & Ćurić, D. (2016). Market potential of lignans and omega-3 functional cookies. British Food Journal, 118(10), 2420–2433. https://doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-03-2016-0117. Dean, M., Lampila, P., Shepherd, R., Arvola, A., Saba, A., Vassallo, M., et al. (2012). Perceived relevance and foods with health-related claims. Food Quality and Preference, 24(1), 129–135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2011.10.006. Dolgopolova, I., Teuber, R., & Bruschi, V. (2015). Consumers' perceptions of functional foods: Trust and food-neophobia in a cross-cultural context. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 39(6), 708–715. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.12184. European Food Safety Authority. Nutrition and health claims. (2017). https://www.efsa. europa.eu/en/topics/topic/nutrition-and-health-claims 2017.10.16. Furno, M., Verneau, F., & Sannino, G. (2016). Assessing hypothetical bias: An analysis beyond the mean of functional food. Food Quality and Preference, 50, 15–26. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2015.12.012. Gineikiene, J., Kiudyte, J., & Degutis, M. (2017). Functional, organic or conventional? Food choices of health conscious and skeptical consumers. Baltic Journal of Management, 12(2), 139–152. https://doi.org/10.1108/BJM-01-2016-0016. Goetzke, I.,B., & Spiller, A. (2014). Health-improving lifestyles of organic and functional food consumers. British Food Journal, 116(3), 510–526. https://doi.org/10.1108/BFJ03-2012-0073. Grunert, K. G. (2017). The health trend. Consumer trends and new product opportunities in the food sector (pp. 15–31). Wageningen Academic Publishers. Grunert, K. G., Lähteenmäki, L., Boztug, Y., Martinsdóttir, E., Ueland, Ø., Åström, A., et al. (2009). Perception of health claims among Nordic consumers. Journal of Consumer Policy, 32(3), 269–287. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10603-009-9110-0. Hellyer, N. E., Fraser, I., & Haddock-Fraser, J. (2012). Food choice, health information and functional ingredients: An experimental auction employing bread. Food Policy, 37(3), 232–245. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2012.02.005. Himmelsbach, E., Allen, A., & Francas, M. (2014). Study on the impact of food information on consumers' decision making TNS european behaviour studies consortium FINAL REPORT. Hirogaki, M. (2013). Estimating consumers' willingness to pay for health food claims: A conjoint analysis. International Journal of Innovation, Management and Technology, 4(6), 541. https://doi.org/10.7763/IJIMT.2013.V4.458. Hoefkens, C., & Verbeke, W. (2013). Consumers' health-related motive orientations and reactions to claims about dietary calcium. Nutrients, 5(1), 82–96. http://www.mdpi. com/2072-6643/5/1/82/htm (2017.10.15. Hung, Y., de Kok, T. M., & Verbeke, W. (2016). Consumer attitude and purchase intention towards processed meat products with natural compounds and a reduced level of nitrite. Meat Science, 121, 119–126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2016.06.002. Kapinova, A., Stefanicka, P., Kubatka, P., Zubor, P., Uramova, S., Kello, M., et al. (2017). Are plant-based functional foods better choice against cancer than single phytochemicals? A critical review of current breast cancer research. Biomedicine & Pharmacotherapy, 96, 1465–1477. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopha.2017.11.134. Kaur, S., & Das, M. (2011). Functional foods: An overview. Food Science and Biotechnology, 20(4), 861. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10068-011-0121-7. Kljusuric, G.,J., Čačić, J., Misir, A., & Čačić, D. (2015). Geographical region as a factor influencing consumers' perception of functional food–case of Croatia. British Food Journal, 117(3), 1017–1031. https://doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-12-2013-0282. Kraus, A. (2015). Factors influencing the decisions to buy and consume functional food. British Food Journal, 117(6), 1622–1636. https://doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-08-20140301. Krutulyte, R., Grunert, K. G., Scholderer, J., Lähteenmäki, L., Hagemann, K. S., Elgaard, P., et al. (2011). Perceived fit of different combinations of carriers and functional ingredients and its effect on purchase intention. Food Quality and Preference, 22(1), 11–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2010.06.001. Küster, I., & Vila, N. (2017). Health/Nutrition food claims and low-fat food purchase: Projected personality influence in young consumers. Journal of Functional Foods, 38, 66–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jff.2017.08.046. Labrecque, J., Doyon, M., Bellavance, F., & Kolodinsky, J. (2006). Acceptance of functional foods: A comparison of French, American, and French Canadian consumers. Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, 54(4), 647–661. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-7976.2006.00071.x. Lalor, F., Kennedy, J., & Wall, P. G. (2011). Impact of nutrition knowledge on behaviour towards health claims on foodstuffs. British Food Journal, 113(6), 753–765. https:// doi.org/10.1108/00070701111140098. Lawless, L. J., Nayga, R. M., Akaichi, F., Meullenet, J. F., Threlfall, R. T., & Howard, L. R. (2012). Willingness-to-Pay for a nutraceutical-rich juice blend. Journal of Sensory Studies, 27(5), 375–383. https://doi.org/10.1111/joss.12002. Lee, K., Lee, Y., & Kwon, S. (2015). How nutrition information frame affects parents' perceptions of restaurants: The moderating role of information credibility. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 46, 112–119. https://doi.org/10. 1016/j.ijhm.2015.01.014. Lesschaeve, I., & Bruwer, J. (2010). The importance of consumer involvement and implications for new product development. Consumer-driven innovation in food and personal care products. Woodhead Publishing386–423. Lu, J. (2015). The effect of perceived carrier-ingredient fit on purchase intention of functional food moderated by nutrition knowledge and health claim. British Food Journal, 117(7), 1872–1885. https://doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-11-2014-0372. Lusk, J. L., & Shogren, J. F. (2007). Experimental auctions: Methods and applications in economic and marketing research. Cambridge University Press. Marette, S., Roosen, J., Blanchemanche, S., & Feinblatt-Mélèze, E. (2010). Functional

food, uncertainty and consumers' choices: A lab experiment with enriched yoghurts for lowering cholesterol. Food Policy, 35(5), 419–428. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. foodpol.2010.04.009. Masson, E., Debucquet, G., Fischler, C., & Merdji, M. (2016). French consumers' perceptions of nutrition and health claims: A psychosocial-anthropological approach. Appetite, 105, 618–629. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2016.06.026. Melbye, E. L., Hansen, H., & Onozaka, Y. (2015). Advertising functional foods: The effects of physical body size and appeal type on ad credibility and purchase intentions. Journal of International Food & Agribusiness Marketing, 27(2), 142–154. https://doi. org/10.1080/08974438.2014.918916. Mellentin, J. (2014). Failures in functional foods and beverages. London, UK: New Nutrition Business. Moro, D., Veneziani, M., Sckokai, P., & Castellari, E. (2015). Consumer willingness to pay for catechin-enriched yogurt: Evidence from a stated choice experiment. Agribusiness, 31(2), 243–258. https://doi.org/10.1002/agr.21401. Moskowitz, H. R., Saguy, I. S., & Straus, T. (Eds.). (2009). An integrated approach to new food product development. CRC Press. Nielsen (2005). Consumer attitudes towards functional foods & organics. https:// foodsecurecanada.org/sites/foodsecurecanada.org/files/2005_functional_organics_ global_online_survey.pdf 2017.10.23. Oliveira, D., Machín, L., Deliza, R., Rosenthal, A., Walter, E. H., Giménez, A., et al. (2016). Consumers' attention to functional food labels: Insights from eye-tracking and change detection in a case study with probiotic milk. LWT-Food Science and Technology, 68, 160–167. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lwt.2015.11.066. van Ooijen, I., Fransen, M. L., Verlegh, P. W., & Smit, E. G. (2017). Signalling product healthiness through symbolic package cues: Effects of package shape and goal congruence on consumer behaviour. Appetite, 109, 73–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. appet.2016.11.021. Orquin, J. L. (2014). A Brunswik lens model of consumer health judgments of packaged foods. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 13(4), 270–281. https://doi.org/10.1002/cb. 1465. Orquin, J., & Scholderer, J. (2011). Attention to health cues on product packages. Journal of Eyetracking, Visual Cognition and Emotion, 1, 59–63. Page, A. L., & Rosenbaum, H. F. (1992). Developing an effective concept testing program for consumer durables. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 9(4), 267–277. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-5885.940267. Pappalardo, G., & Lusk, J. L. (2016). The role of beliefs in purchasing process of functional foods. Food Quality and Preference, 53, 151–158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual. 2016.06.009. Patch, C. S., Tapsell, L. C., & Williams, P. G. (2005). Overweight consumers' salient beliefs on omega-3-enriched functional foods in Australia's Illawarra region. Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior, 37(2), 83–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/S14994046(06)60020-1. Peng, L., & Finn, A. (2010). How far can you rely on a concept test: The generalizability of testing over occasions. International Journal of Market Research, 52(3), 353–372. https://doi.org/10.2501/S1470785310201314. Ravoniarison, A. (2017). Senior consumers and risk/benefit trade-off in functional foods. British Food Journal, 119(6), 1232–1246. https://doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-06-20160267. Reis, F. S., Martins, A., Vasconcelos, M. H., Morales, P., & Ferreira, I. C. (2017). Functional foods based on extracts or compounds derived from mushrooms. Trends in Food Science & Technology, 66, 48–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2017.05.010. Rezai, G., Kit Teng, P., Mohamed, Z., & Shamsudin, M. N. (2014). Structural equation modeling of consumer purchase intention toward synthetic functional foods. Journal of Food Products Marketing, 20(sup1), 13–34. https://doi.org/10.1080/10454446. 2014.921868. Rezai, G., Teng, P. K., Shamsudin, M. N., Mohamed, Z., & Stanton, J. L. (2017). Effect of perceptual differences on consumer purchase intention of natural functional food. Journal of Agribusiness in Developing and Emerging Economies, 7(2), 153–173. https:// doi.org/10.1108/JADEE-02-2015-0014. Romano, K. R., Finco, F. D. B. A., Rosenthal, A., Finco, M. V. A., & Deliza, R. (2016). Willingness to pay more for value-added pomegranate juice (Punica granatum L.): An open-ended contingent valuation. Food Research International, 89, 359–364. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2016.08.039. Romano, K. R., Rosenthal, A., & Deliza, R. (2015). How do Brazilian consumers perceive a non-traditional and innovative fruit juice? An approach looking at the packaging. Food Research International, 74, 123–130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2015.04. 033. Roosen, J., Bieberstein, A., Blanchemanche, S., Goddard, E., Marette, S., & Vandermoere, F. (2015). Trust and willingness to pay for nanotechnology food. Food Policy, 52, 75–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2014.12.004. Saguy, I. S., & Moskowitz, H. R. (1999). Integrating the consumer into new product development. Food technology. Santeramo, F. G., Carlucci, D., De Devitiis, B., Seccia, A., Stasi, A., Viscecchia, R., et al. (2017). Emerging trends in European food, diets and food industry. Food Research International, 104, 39–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2017.10.039. Schnettler, B., Miranda, H., Lobos, G., Sepulveda, J., Orellana, L., Mora, M., et al. (2015). Willingness to purchase functional foods according to their benefits: Consumer profiles in Southern Chile. British Food Journal, 117(5), 1453–1473. https://doi.org/10. 1108/BFJ-07-2014-0273. Shan, L. C., Henchion, M., De Brún, A., Murrin, C., Wall, P. G., & Monahan, F. J. (2017). Factors that predict consumer acceptance of enriched processed meats. Meat Science, 133, 185–193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2017.07.006. Siegrist, M., Shi, J., Giusto, A., & Hartmann, C. (2015). Worlds apart. Consumer acceptance of functional foods and beverages in Germany and China. Appetite, 92, 87–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2015.05.017.

9

Appetite 143 (2019) 104398

B. Plasek and Á. Temesi Singer, L., Williams, P. G., Ridges, L., Murray, S., & McMahon, A. (2006). Consumer reactions to different health claim formats on food labels. Food Australia, 58, 92–97. Siró, I., Kapolna, E., Kapolna, B., & Lugasi, A. (2008). Functional food. Product development, marketing and consumer acceptance—a review. Appetite, 51(3), 456–467. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2008.05.060. Strijbos, C., Schluck, M., Bisschop, J., Bui, T., De Jong, I., Van Leeuwen, M., ... van Breda, S. G. (2016). Consumer awareness and credibility factors of health claims on innovative meat products in a cross-sectional population study in The Netherlands. Food Quality and Preference, 54, 13–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2016.06. 014. Szakály, Z., Szente, V., Kövér, G., Polereczki, Z., & Szigeti, O. (2012). The influence of lifestyle on health behavior and preference for functional foods. Appetite, 58(1), 406–413. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2011.11.003. Teuber, R., Dolgopolova, I., & Nordström, J. (2016). Some like it organic, some like it purple and some like it ancient: Consumer preferences and WTP for value-added attributes in whole grain bread. Food Quality and Preference, 52, 244–254. https://doi.

org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2016.05.002. Van Kleef, E., van Trijp, H. C., & Luning, P. (2005). Functional foods: Health claim-food product compatibility and the impact of health claim framing on consumer evaluation. Appetite, 44(3), 299–308. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2005.01.009. Vecchio, R., Van Loo, E. J., & Annunziata, A. (2016). Consumers' willingness to pay for conventional, organic and functional yogurt: Evidence from experimental auctions. International Journal Of Consumer Studies, 40(3), 368–378. https://doi.org/10.1111/ ijcs.12264. Verbeke, W., Scholderer, J., & Lähteenmäki, L. (2009). Consumer appeal of nutrition and health claims in three existing product concepts. Appetite, 52(3), 684–692. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2009.03.007. Wind, Y. (1973). A new procedure for concept evaluation. Journal of Marketing, 2–11https://doi.org/10.1177/002224297303700402. Zaikin, A. A., & McCluskey, J. J. (2013). Consumer preferences for new technology: Apples enriched with antioxidant coatings in Uzbekistan. Agricultural Economics, 44(4–5), 513–521. https://doi.org/10.1111/agec.12035.

10