Cited by 45Nutrition, Health and Food BehaviorFood Industry and Aquatic BiologyConsumer Attitudes and Food Labeling

European consumer perceptions and barriers for fresh, frozen, preserved and ready-meal fish products

Vanhonacker, Filiep, Pieniak, Zuzanna, Verbeke, Wim·2013·British Food Journal

Abstract

Purpose This study aims to investigate consumers' perceptions and barriers in relation to fresh, frozen, preserved and ready‐meal fish products in a geographically diverse selection of European countries. Design/methodology/approach Cross‐sectional data were collected through a consumer survey (n=3,213), conducted in June 2008 in the Czech Republic, Germany, Greece, Italy, Portugal, Romania, Sweden and the UK. Items measured were self‐reported consumption frequencies, consumer perceptions of different fish product categories, and perceived barriers for increased fish consumption levels. Country specificities are discussed. Findings The overriding healthy perception consumers have about fish was confirmed, and contributed very strongly to the general perception consumers have about fish. Fresh fish was perceived the most healthy fish product, followed by frozen, preserved and ready‐meal fish products. Perception scores were highest correlated with self‐reported fish consumption in the Mediterranean countries. With the exception of Romania, perceived barriers only poorly explained self‐reported consumption frequencies of the different fish product categories. This finding is related to the possible influence of habit and tradition with regard to eating fish, to the absence of measures related to motivations or drivers to consume fish, or to the possibility that some of the perceived barriers reinforce each other. In the Mediterranean countries, fish consumption frequency is on a very high level, independently of perceived barriers and motivational aspects, and part of the traditional Mediterranean diet. Originality/value The strength of this study pertains to its international scope and geographical spread. Further, consumer perceptions and perceived barriers in relation to fresh, frozen, preserved and ready‐meal fish products have rarely been studied in parallel. Findings are relevant to support efforts on national and international level to stimulate or modify fish consumption, and to explore opportunities to trade fish products.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1108/00070701311317810

Cites

21 of 21 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In affluent economies, changes in meat consumption habits are driven by heterogeneity in valuations of product characteristics and increasing relevance of health, ethical and ecological issues.

    “In affluent economies, changes in meat consumption habits are driven by the heterogeneity in the valuations of product characteristics by individuals (Gracia & de-Magistris, 2013) and by the increasing relevance of health concerns, ethical and ecological issues (Vanhonacker, Pieniak, & Verbeke, 2013).”

    From Emerging trends in European food, diets and food industry (2018) · cites this paper as Vanhonacker et al., 2013

  • Many studies showed strong scepticism of western consumers towards introduction of food with insect-based ingredients, especially in countries where insects are not traditionally considered food.

    “Despite the benefits, many studies showed a strong scepticism of western consumers towards the introduction of food with insect-based ingredients, especially in that countries where insects are not traditionally considered to be food (Vanhonacker et al., 2013;Verbeke, 2015).”

    From Emerging trends in European food, diets and food industry (2018) · cites this paper as Vanhonacker et al., 2013

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 23 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Vanhonacker, F., Pieniak, Z., & Verbeke, W.
Affiliations
Ghent University (BE)
Venue
British Food Journal
Publisher
Emerald
Published
2013-04-12
Volume
115
Issue
4
Pages
508-525
ISSN
0007-070X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2049454275
Cited by
45
References
23
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 2
FWCI
2.16
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • British Food Journal (publishedVersion)
  • Ghent University Academic Bibliography (Ghent University) (submittedVersion)
  • Flanders Marine Institute (Flanders Marine Institute) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Directorate-General for Maritime Affairs and Fisheries
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Nutrition, Health and Food Behavior
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Food Industry and Aquatic Biology
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Consumer Attitudes and Food Labeling
Keywords
fish consumption, consumer perception, perceived barriers, fresh fish, frozen fish, preserved fish, Mediterranean diet, dietary habits, fish consumption promotion, cross-national comparison

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review