CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 356Sensory Analysis and Statistical MethodsConsumer Packaging Perceptions and TrendsConsumer Attitudes and Food Labeling

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 31 of the 31 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

EFFECTS OF DISCONFIRMED CONSUMER EXPECTATIONS ON FOOD ACCEPTABILITY

CARDELLO, A.V., SAWYER, F.M.·1992·Journal of Sensory Studies
DOI 10.1111/j.1745-459x.1992.tb00194.x
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

ABSTRACT Three studies were conducted to assess the effects of disconfirmed consumer expectations on food acceptability. In the first, disconfirmed expectations for the sensory attributes of an edible film had a negative effect on acceptability of the film. Greater disconfirmation resulted in lower acceptance and purchase intent. In the second study, written product information was used to establish three levels of expected acceptability and expected bitterness for a novel fruit beverage. Comparison of preexposure (expected) and postexposure (perceived) ratings of acceptability and bitterness supported an assimilation model of disconfirmation effects for conditions in which expectations of acceptability were high and expectations of bitterness were low. A contrast effect was observed for bitterness judgments when expectations of bitterness were high. Associative effects resulting from the expectation manipulation were observed on other sensory attributes. In the third study, expectations were manipulated to influence both direction (positive versus negative) and degree of disconfirmation for the acceptance of cola beverages. Results provided further support for an assimilation model of these effects.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1745-459x.1992.tb00194.x

Cites

31 of 31 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

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?

Citations

Cites

Show all 30 references

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. LAND D.G., 1983, Sensory Quality of Foods and Beverages, 15
  2. OLSON J.C., 1976, Advances in Consumer Research, 168
  3. SHERIF M., 1961, Social Judgement: Assimilation and Contrast Effects in Communication and Attitude Change
  4. TRAWICK I.F., 1980, Marketing in the 80's, 97

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 301–356 of 356

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
CARDELLO, A. V., & SAWYER, F. M.
Affiliations
  • United States Department of the Army (US)
  • University of Massachusetts Amherst (US)
Corresponding author
CARDELLO, A.V.
ORCID
CARDELLO, A.V.
Venue
Journal of Sensory Studies
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1992-12
Volume
7
Issue
4
Pages
253-277
ISSN
  • 0887-8250 (ISSN-L)
  • 1745-459X
DOI
10.1111/j.1745-459x.1992.tb00194.x
OpenAlex
W1966381666
Cited by
352
References
30
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 23 · 2018: 21 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 18 · 2015: 16 · 2014: 22 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 16
FWCI
5.77
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor (vor, 5268 d)
Locations
Journal of Sensory Studies (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Sensory Analysis and Statistical Methods
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › Consumer Packaging Perceptions and Trends
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Consumer Attitudes and Food Labeling
Keywords
food acceptance, assimilation model, contrast effects, purchase intention, edible films, bitterness perception, cola beverages, sensory properties, associative effects

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