Aligning product expectations with personal values improves the sensory experience and consumer acceptability of a product. It’s a tenet of Value-Based Purchasing an this article sets out to explain some of these features – not all just some!
Personal values and sensory acceptance might seem an odd association to make and one that would appear difficult to research. However, it has been in the news lately because a number of sensory and psychology researchers, and marketing experts have latched onto the question as to how we all interact with products of any sort that identify with our own ethical and moral values.
In 2021, the IFT made it one of their guiding questions: Can values-based purchasing as in global citizenship impact nutrition inequity globally? Also, do people care enough such that they as consumers make a difference? These two questions were addressed in a presentation titled ‘I feel good so it tastes good’ by Jonathan Kershaw for the IFT FIRST event and it made for an extremely interesting and intriguing set of observations. In this particular article it’s worth exploring the nature of the answers because it is a subject that deserves critical examination.
What is Value-Based Purchasing?
Value-based purchasing is a strategy that looks likely to have an impact on what is often termed nutrition equity. Nutrition equity is a term defined by the Hunger Task Force as
“All children should have equal access to nutritious and culturally appropriate meals at school, regardless of their race, gender, ethnicity or zip code.”
The context though is often about nutrition inequity. Whilst this is focused upon in the USA it would be a subject that has global implications. Value-based purchasing also encompasses the topic of sustainability of the food system and this too deserves some attention.
Sustainability is mainly about two elements: (1) environmental sustainability and in political terms the use and abuse of natural resources, (2) human sustainability including topics such as nutrition inequity, fair trade and food justice. In short, as Dr Kershaw explained at the outset, there are ‘many values-based contexts that if (the) consumer shifted their purchases could result in a more equitable and sustainable food system.’
It is a truism that people do care about issues of nutrition, sustainability, moral and ethical values. As consumers though can they truly make a difference?
The answer appears to be a big fat ‘yes’. You only need to consult social media and news outlets to find a number of people that are passionate about a wide range of issues and topics that have influence our food system. It is a yes, if consumers collectively shifted their food behaviour because it would incentivise a more sustainable food system. However, because of the diversity of causes followed by the consumer population, it’s difficult to propose a single solution. A number of people have no care at all about nutrition inequity, but they probably care considerably about a range of other issues almost exclusively.
Choice Reflects Priorities
A good example of consumer choice being influenced by a product strapline is the use of palm oil. For some their top priority is to avoid palm oil at all costs as an ingredient because monoculture growth means loss of rainforest – look at the loss of habitat for apes such as orangutans in Borneo.
Where does the sensory element come in though? For the mainstream consumer, taste is the most influential factor in their food purchase decisions. The other factors are health and price, safety and convenience which are all important but to differing degrees.
The next question then posed is, could we align the food qualities people care about that influence their food purchases with the practices that create a more sustainable and equitable food system? A bit of a mouthful I’m afraid but this brought out a more constructive answer.
From our presenter’s perspective to truly create a more sustainable food system we have a responsibility to consult the evidence base. To identify those practices that are most impactful rather than just pivoting to the trendiest topic or buzzword that may or may not make a difference regarding the topics that are addressed today.
So, what if values-based purchasing was also tasty, healthy, affordable or convenient?
From a sensory perspective, taste is a specific factor for consideration. The idea that communicating product characteristics that align with consumers values can actually result in an improved sensory taste experience. This idea that expectations that alter the sensory experience is nothing new.
Opportunity: Messages And Messaging Influence Sensory Liking
A variety of studies have demonstrated that values -based on ethical labels and messaging can result in overall product liking. The following labels have been demonstrated in previous research papers to have this particular impact.
- ‘organic’ – chicken (Samant & Seo, 2016b), yogurt (Lee et al., 2013)
- humane treatment of animals as in their animal conditions/welfare – lamb (Napolitano et al., 2007), chicken (Samant & Seo, 2016b) and beef (Anderson et al., 2016)
- eco-friendly – fruit (Sorqvist et al., 2015) & coffee (Sorqvist et al., 2013)
- fair-trade – chocolate, coffee, (Lotz et al., 2013) juice (Schouteten et al., 2021)
All these show an effect of labelling on improved product liking. It doesn’t always work though – just using a label or claim on a product without credibility is likely to have limited success. There are a few examples cited in the research where there is a product and claim mis-match: water (Sorqvist et al., 2013), cookies (Lee et al., 2013), biscuits food-aid (Schuldt et al., 2013).
Labelling effect is most consistent for ‘liking’ rather than specific sensory attributes (Anderson et al., 2016; Samant & Seo, 2016; Poelman, 2008; Schouten et al., 2021).
There must be a match between the product and the claim. Eco-friendly water doesn’t taste better an neither do organic cookies or biscuits labelled with sustainable ingredients. To illustrate the limitations of this labeling effect, one research group labeled a food aid product for malnutrition as organic. They did not collected any sensory data. The research showed that the organic product was perceived to be much less effective. The research team hypothesized that because organic is often associated with ‘healthy’ as a term which apparently for many people means low calorie and few ingredients. The term healthy in this instance was perceived as incompatible with a product that needed to be high in calories with multiple functional additives for the benefits that were being claimed in order to be effective. Together this shows the importance of what is termed as congruency meaning a form of alignment. One needs to ask -what does the consumer associate with this product and with this claim? Then check to see if they match. Also we must consider that the effect of labeling on the taste experience is much more consistently observed for overall liking rather than for specific sensory attributes.
This is the issue where not enough people have food to eat yet others have a superabundance of nutrition. It does seem from research evidence though that value-based purchasing actually improves subjective sensory evaluation. What that means is that for a consumer, their taste experience is helped when the product expectations are aligned with their own personal values.
When you look at social media, there are plenty of people with plenty of views on what makes them passionate about life. It can encompass the environment, the climate, all aspects of the COVID pandemic and so on. I suppose what it all means is that because people are consumers they make a difference. One of the underlying issues of the day is the food system and how it is managed in the context of environment and supply. It is perfectly acceptable to think that if we all acted with one voice, our collective behaviour would radically alter the way the sustainable food system developed. What complicates matters and actually makes it seem impossible to achieve is the great diversity of causes we are being asked to consider. It makes finding a single solution so much more difficult. We could case about greenhouse gases but our neighbour is more bother about lack of nutrition in other countries. How do you bring all these questions together and then start trying to come up with a single or even small set of easily implementable solutions?
The Factors That Increase Message Effectiveness
As well as product claim congruency, there are a number of other factors that increase the impact of labeling on the sensory experience.
Five key factors increase effectiveness of a marketing message. They are trust (Samant & Seo, 2016), concern (Grunert et al., 2014), understanding (Samant & Seo, 2016; Grunert et al., 2014), consumption patterns (Jiang et al., 2021) and values alignment (Grankvist et al., 2007; Poelman et al., 2008; Sorqvist et al., 2015; Bratanova et al., 2015).
When a claim is seen as trustworthy and when it is easily understood or when the cause aligns with consumers values and concerns, thus clarity in communication and targeting those that care is critical to see the effect of values-based messages on an improved sensory experience.
The study by Samant and Seo (2016b) examined the perception of quality and acceptability of chicken breast meat. This food had been labeled with sustainability claims and it was shown that acceptability (i.e. a form of trust) varied as a function of the way in which the consumers degree of understanding of the label. It may seem obvious but the use of sustainability labelling increased both perception of quality and acceptability of the chicken meat. the label effect was more pronounced when consumers were well informed about the label. Most interestingly, the label effect on quality perception and acceptability varied by label-claim type.
Understanding according to Grunert et al., (2014) felt that environmental and sustainability labels would not influence the food purchasing behaviour of highly concerned consumers.
One potential theme to unite these observations is that of moral satisfaction or this effect of positive feelings associated with doing the right thing (Bratanova et al., 2015).
A few research articles have highlighted how ethical information improves taste expectations and experiences. In other words ‘When I feel good, so it tastes good’. How is this possible? Well for many of us we achieve a sense of moral satisfaction when we have feelings of doing the ‘right thing’. From philanthropic activities such as giving blood, there is a lot of evidence that people experience a reward for feeling like I did the right thing and this may be true for food.
That also means a sense of possessing overall positive feelings (Lotz et al., 2013) which are coupled to other ‘halo’ effects (Schuldt et al., 2013) and also having neurological reward systems (Enax et al., 2015).
Experimental psychology tells us of a connection between our sensory systems and moral judgement. This connection may be a direct result of moral satisfaction or due to just an overall feeling of positivity or other halo effects. Neurological reward systems may also explain this association. All these help explain how feeling good helps a product to taste good.
Is moral satisfaction modifiable? Does it lead to altered food perception and intake?
When considering this connection between morals and tastes, is this modifiable? Can we induce a change in moral satisfaction? Through information campaigns for example? Would this in turn result in changes the way that people see food and the food they choose to eat.
A Bowling State University sensory group lead by JC Kershaw attempted to answer some of these questions posed via an 8 week text-message intervention study. Students were the participants in this study and were assigned to one of two groups. The 1st group received two text messages a week about health benefits of plant-based eating, and the other group received messages about environmental benefits of plant-based eating. The researchers recorded what they ate through dietary recalls at the beginning and end of this study. They used questionnaires that captured their values, moral satisfaction etc.
The research group noticed a change in moral satisfaction following text message intervention in both groups. The level of moral satisfaction was higher (more positive) at the end of study for both groups. It was more pronounced when participants received messages aligned with their values.
The researchers did not see a correlation for most food groups in the preliminary analysis. They did however see a change in moral satisfaction correlated with a higher intake of whole grains and a higher FV taste perception in the group receiving environmental messages. At least for the environmental group, the tastiness of fruits and veg was higher at end of study. This suggests a possible role of moral satisfaction as a target to improve diet quality. To succeed, this would likely need to be combined with other strategies to improve the diet.
How can people passionate about a number of causes be involved to make a difference?
We must meet people where they are at. We can’t expect everyone to care about what we care about, especially considering the many competing values and influences on food choice.
Aligning Product Values with Consumers’ Values
We consider:
- what does a product stand for? Who resonates with that message? When the product values align with the consumer values an improved taste experience is likely thus the values-based cause can attract people to the product but it will be the improved taste experience that keeps them coming back.
- Find the market that values that stance
- align message to enhance the taste experience
Future Directions
The next set of questions to be answered are:
- Do social justice messages alter sensory experiences?
- Do ’causes’ have a sensory profile?
- Does the effects of moral satisfaction extend to non-food issues?
- How do we use these learnings to improve nutrition equity?
The FMI, (Food Industry Association) recently proposed that social justice is next topic in the food industry. When understanding sensory implications, social justice messaging maybe increasingly important. Are there certain sensory expectations or associations with specific causes? Metaphors aside, what is the ‘taste’ of justice? sweet or bitter. Do these effects of moral satisfaction extend to non-food issues? Current research focusses on moral issues that are directly related to food production. However, as companies are increasingly taking a stance on a number of political and moral issues, we should ask how could this alter the sensory experience. Consumer are becoming increasingly interested in a company’s values. It is increasingly more important to understand how moral satisfaction influences the sensory experience and the collective food decisions that are shaping our food system.
In the end, the question is not whether consumers can make a difference with their food choices but how they can make a difference. By marketing foods made or grown in a particular way to the consumers who care about the farming or food system practice on the label, you’re more likely to capitalize on the moral satisfaction–taste connection and see a difference.
References
Anderson, E. C., & Barrett, L. F. (2016). Affective beliefs influence the experience of eating meat. PLoS One, 11(8), e0160424.
Bratanova, B., Vauclair, C. M., Kervyn, N., Schumann, S., Wood, R., & Klein, O. (2015). Savouring morality. Moral satisfaction renders food of ethical origin subjectively tastier. Appetite, 91, pp. 137-149.
Enax, L., Krapp, V., Piehl, A., & Weber, B. (2015). Effects of social sustainability signaling on neural valuation signals and taste-experience of food products. Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, 9, 247.
Grankvist, G., Lekedal, H., & Marmendal, M. (2007). Values and eco‐and fair‐trade labelled products. British Food Journal.
Grunert, K. G., Hieke, S., & Wills, J. (2014). Sustainability labels on food products: Consumer motivation, understanding and use. Food Policy, 44, pp. 177-189.
Jiang, R., Sharma, C., Bryant, R., Mohan, M. S., Al-Marashdeh, O., Harrison, R., & Torrico, D. D. (2021). Animal welfare information affects consumers’ hedonic and emotional responses towards milk. Food Research International, 141, 110006.
Lee, W. C. J., Shimizu, M., Kniffin, K. M., & Wansink, B. (2013). You taste what you see: Do organic labels bias taste perceptions?. Food Quality and Preference, 29(1), pp. 33-39.
Lotz, S., Christandl, F., & Fetchenhauer, D. (2013). What is fair is good: Evidence of consumers’ taste for fairness. Food Quality and Preference, 30(2), 139-144.
Napolitano, F., Braghieri, A., Caroprese, M., Marino, R., Girolami, A., & Sevi, A. (2007). Effect of information about animal welfare, expressed in terms of rearing conditions, on lamb acceptability. Meat science, 77(3), 431-436.
Poelman, A., Mojet, J., Lyon, D., & Sefa-Dedeh, S. (2008). The influence of information about organic production and fair trade on preferences for and perception of pineapple. Food Quality and Preference, 19(1), 114-121.
Rondoni, A., & Grasso, S. (2021). Consumers behaviour towards carbon footprint labels on food: A review of the literature and discussion of industry implications. Journal of Cleaner Production, 127031.
Samant, S. S., Chapko, M. J., & Seo, H. S. (2017). Predicting consumer liking and preference based on emotional responses and sensory perception: A study with basic taste solutions. Food research international, 100, 325-334.
Samant, S. S., & Seo, H. S. (2016a). Quality perception and acceptability of chicken breast meat labeled with sustainability claims vary as a function of consumers’ label-understanding level. Food Quality and Preference, 49, pp. 151-160.
Samant, S. S., & Seo, H. S. (2016b). Effects of label understanding level on consumers’ visual attention toward sustainability and process-related label claims found on chicken meat products. Food quality and preference, 50, 48-56.
Schouteten, J. J., Gellynck, X., & Slabbinck, H. (2021). Do Fair Trade Labels Bias Consumers’ Perceptions of Food Products? A Comparison Between a Central Location Test and Home-Use Test. Sustainability, 13(3), 1384.
Schuldt, J. P., & Hannahan, M. (2013). When good deeds leave a bad taste. Negative inferences from ethical food claims. Appetite, 62, 76-83.
Sörqvist, P., Haga, A., Langeborg, L., Holmgren, M., Wallinder, M., Nöstl, A., … & Marsh, J. E. (2015). The green halo: Mechanisms and limits of the eco-label effect. Food quality and preference, 43, 1-9.
Sörqvist, P., Hedblom, D., Holmgren, M., Haga, A., Langeborg, L., Nöstl, A., & Kågström, J. (2013). Who needs cream and sugar when there is eco-labeling? Taste and willingness to pay for “eco-friendly” coffee. PloS One, 8(12), e80719.
Leave a Reply