Previous research on consumer attitudes towards new and novel foods, such as functional foods and insects, has stressed the important role of perceived fit of carrier-ingredient combination on acceptability (e.g Krutulyte et al., 2011, Tan et al., 2017, Tan et al., 2015, Bech-Larsen and Grunert, 2003, Lu, 2015, Van Kleef et al., 2005, Lyly et al., 2007, Verbeke et al., 2009). For example, Tan et al. (2015) found that grasshoppers were perceived as appropriate with chili and salt but inappropriate with chocolate due to perceived sensory mismatch and/or due to a perceived role of insects as meat substitutes. Also, in a consumer study on functional foods, Ares and Gámbaro (2007) concluded that the carrier product had the greatest effect on consumers’ willingness to try different functional food concepts.
Without neglecting the crucial role that the carrier product type plays, in this study the carrier effect was removed by choosing carrier products that conceptually represent an appropriate carrier-ingredient combination. In this way, the compatibility between ingredient and carrier, (i.e. offal extracted ingredients incorporated in meat based products) allowed us to study the effect of the other factors of interest. Sausages and burgers were the carrier food products chosen to
94
serve this scope. Given that these products are commonly prepared with collagen or intestine casings and red offal, it is expected that ideationally it is not incongruent to add ingredients extracted from offal in these products, as opposed to a product characterised by totally different properties (e.g. coffee). Furthermore, this choice was also reinforced by the review undertaken in Chapter 2 (see section 2.4.1) where most recommendations concerning the applications of offal extracted protein for the food industry, were targeting processed meat products. Finally, in accordance with the study by de Beukelaar et al. (2019), it was decided to include two different food product concepts in order to control for individual differences in liking for the specific food products and also to serve as internal replication for the study.
Selection of protein source
As discussed earlier and more extensively in the previous chapter (see section 4.2.4), familiarity with the attitude object influences individuals' attitude formation and the effect of cognitive and affective attitude component on overall attitudes. Manipulations in familiarity with the product concepts containing protein extracted from beef offal (i.e. familiar versus unfamiliar) were applied in this study in order to address the role of individuals' perceived familiarity with the product concepts in influencing their attitudes towards these products.
The selection of the familiar and unfamiliar product concepts containing protein extracted from beef offal was based on a pre-test conducted with 26 Irish consumers, during an event called "Science week" which took place in Teagasc, Ashtown Food Research Centre. This open-to-the-public event, celebrates science in everyday life, and offers the general public the opportunity to participate in workshops, talks, laboratory demonstrations, science walks and other science-related events. Visitors of this event were approached and asked to fill in a short questionnaire (questionnaire used in this pre-test can be found in Appendix II). The participants reported their familiarity with burgers and sausages containing protein extracted from six different beef offal sources: heart, blood, liver, lung, bone and skin. The selection of these sources is based on the review undertaken in Chapter 2 (see section 2.4.1) regarding the most promising sources for exploration for the food industry. Familiarity with these product concepts was measured using a five-point scale (1-not
95
known as food, 2-known as food but never tasted, 3-tasted before, 4-eat occasionally, 5-eat regularly) according to Tuorila et al. (2001).
Based on reported high and low levels of familiarity (see Table 5.1), the following choices regarding the familiar and unfamiliar product concepts were made:
familiar products consisted of "burger containing protein extracted from beef
liver" and "sausages containing protein extracted from beef liver"
unfamiliar products consisted of "burger containing protein extracted from
beef lung" and "sausages containing protein extracted from beef lung".
Table 5.1 Means for familiarity with burgers and sausages containing added protein extracted from 6
different beef offal sources (n=26) (measured on 5-point scale)
Burger containing added protein extracted from:
Liver Blood Heart Lung Bone Skin
Familiarity (M) 2.08 2.04 1.88 1.69 1.65 1.62
Sausages containing added protein extracted from:
Liver Blood Heart Lung Bone Skin
Familiarity (M) 1.92 2.00 1.92 1.50 1.54 1.69
Information provision manipulation
Manipulations in information provision (no information/benefit
information/ambiguous information) were used in order to explore the role of information provision in the process of attitude formation. More specifically, participants in all conditions were informed that the presented food products contained protein extracted from beef liver/lung. In the "Benefit information" condition, an extensive information text was given to participants about the health and environmental benefits of protein extracted from beef liver/lung for human consumption. In the "Ambiguous Information" condition, a more extensive text was given to participants containing ambiguous arguments regarding the health and environmental benefits of protein extracted from beef liver/lung for human consumption.
96
To validate that the two information texts differ in terms of arguments' strength and valence, a pre-test was conducted with 29 Irish students. Following personal communication by the research team with a professor based in University College Dublin, access was allowed to an undergraduate class. Participants received either the benefit or the ambiguous information text and were asked to evaluate the strength and the valence of the arguments presented in the information. Strength of these arguments was measured using a three-item, seven-point scale (very weak-very strong, not very convincing-very convincing, not very powerful-very powerful) in accordance with Gürhan-Canli and Maheswaran (2000) and Gürhan-Canli and Batra (2004) (reported Cronbach's alpha .83 and 9.2 respectively). Valence of given information was measured with a single item, seven-point scale (very negative- very positive) (questionnaires used in this pre-test can be found in Appendix III).
The text providing "benefit information" (M=5.66, SD= 0.81) was perceived to have more positive valence by the students in the pre-test than the "ambiguous
information" text (M=4.71, SD= 1.06). One-way Anova revealed that this difference
is statistically significant (F =(1,27) = 7.33, p = .01). The strength of arguments in the "benefit information" text (M = 4.88, SD= 0.95) was found to be higher than in the "ambiguous information" text (M=4.16, SD= 1.00). One-way Anova showed that this difference is statistically significant (F (1,27) = 3.942, p = .05).
It should be noted here that literature suggests that the impact of information provision on consumers' attitudes is strongly affected by perceived credibility and trustworthiness of the information source (e.g. Henchion et al., 2016, Cash et al., 2015, Gray et al., 2005, Costa-Font et al., 2008, Frewer et al., 2003) and especially in those situations where attitudes have not yet crystallised (Frewer et al., 1998). In this study, the source of the information was intentionally unspecified in order to minimize the potential effect of information source credibility on participants' expressed attitudes.
97