کد مقاله | کد نشریه | سال انتشار | مقاله انگلیسی | نسخه تمام متن |
---|---|---|---|---|
4316826 | 1411890 | 2017 | 11 صفحه PDF | دانلود رایگان |
• Emoji were used to measure emotional associations to food and beverage names.
• On average, consumers used 1–2 emoji per food name.
• Emoji measurement worked with consumers from USA and China.
• Test/retest data confirmed that emoji responses to food names were repeatable.
• Responses were sensitive to consumers product liking and consumption frequency.
Measurement of consumers’ emotional associations to food/beverage stimuli is one way to obtain product insights that extend beyond hedonic responses. Survey methods are a popular way to obtain direct responses from consumers, but concerns over their ecological validity exist. In this research, a preliminary investigation and assessment of emoji-based questionnaires as a potential method for measuring food-related emotional associations was conducted. Six studies involving 1087 consumers in USA and China were conducted using names of foods and beverages as the stimuli. On average consumers selected 1–2 emoji per stimulus. The elicited data was able to discriminate between stimuli that span the hedonic continuum and generate detailed emotional product profiles. Less discrimination was obtained between hedonically similar stimuli, but meaningful emotional profiles were elicited nonetheless. Repeatability of emoji responses was high and data with good face validity was obtained from American and Chinese consumers. Emoji responses from groups of consumers who liked/disliked a focal stimulus were different (in the expected directions) and frequency of consumption also influenced emoji responses. The preliminary investigations reported here suggest that emoji may have potential as a method for direct measurement of emotional associations to foods and beverages. Additional research is required to further develop this emoji-based approach, including assessment of its pros and cons of and performance relative to existing tools.
Journal: Food Quality and Preference - Volume 56, Part A, March 2017, Pages 38–48