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
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
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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 the citing paper
“One of the most important means by which exteroceptive cues influence food perception relates to expectancy e ects [176-179].”
From The Role of Intrinsic and Extrinsic Sensory Factors in Sweetness Perception of Food and Beverages: A Review (2019) · cites this paper as [178]
Citations
Cites
A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance
Festinger, L. (1957) · doi:10.1515/9781503620766 · Cited by 24,241
(2025) · doi:10.53555/acr.v2i2 · Cited by 13,486
Motivational determinants of risk-taking behavior.
Atkinson, J. W. (1957) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/h0043445 · Cited by 3,706
Parducci, A., & Helson, H. (1965) · The American Journal of Psychology · doi:10.2307/1421107 · Cited by 2,493
Nebraska Symposium on Motivation
Wittenborn, J. R. (1959) · The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease · doi:10.1097/00005053-195907000-00020 · Cited by 1,907
Nebraska Symposium on Motivation, 1959
Jones, M. R. (1960) · The American Journal of the Medical Sciences · doi:10.1097/00000441-196007000-00049 · Cited by 1,843
Oliver, R. L. (1977) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.62.4.480 · Cited by 1,770
Response Determinants in Satisfaction Judgments
Oliver, R. L., & DeSarbo, W. S. (1988) · Journal of Consumer Research · doi:10.1086/209131 · Cited by 1,682
Motives in fantasy, action, and society
Atkinson, J. W. (1958) · Cited by 1,605
Hedonic scale method of measuring food preferences.
Peryam, D. R., & Pilgrim, F. J. (1957) · Food technology · Cited by 1,344
Research works printed but not linked: 4
- LAND D.G., 1983, Sensory Quality of Foods and Beverages, 15
- OLSON J.C., 1976, Advances in Consumer Research, 168
- SHERIF M., 1961, Social Judgement: Assimilation and Contrast Effects in Communication and Attitude Change
- TRAWICK I.F., 1980, Marketing in the 80's, 97
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Piqueras-Fiszman, B., & Spence, C. (2015) · Food Quality and Preference · doi:10.1016/j.foodqual.2014.09.013 · Cited by 855
Blame the Bot: Anthropomorphism and Anger in Customer–Chatbot Interactions
Crolic, C., Thomaz, F., Hadi, R., & Stephen, A. T. (2021) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1177/00222429211045687 · Cited by 874
DELIZA, R., & MacFIE, H. J. H. (1996) · Journal of Sensory Studies · doi:10.1111/j.1745-459x.1996.tb00036.x · Cited by 763
The construct of food involvement in behavioral research: scale development and validation☆
Bell, R., & Marshall, D. (2003) · Appetite · doi:10.1016/s0195-6663(03)00009-6 · Cited by 396
Consumer preferences for beef color and packaging did not affect eating satisfaction
Carpenter, C. E., Cornforth, D. P., & Whittier, D. (2001) · Meat Science · doi:10.1016/s0309-1740(00)00111-x · Cited by 371
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
- 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
- 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