Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Consumer Acceptance of High-Pressure Processed Products: American Perspective

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
High Pressure Processing of Food

Part of the book series: Food Engineering Series ((FSES))

Abstract

This chapter reviews consumer acceptance of high-pressure processed products from an American consumer perspective. Acceptance of products processed by novel processing technologies depends on the consumer’s perception of benefits and risks. These include the impact of the technology on taste, the convenience, the nutritional value, the perceived safety of the process or technology, the magnitude of the risk the technology reduces, and the effect of the technology on the environment.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 259.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 329.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 329.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • America Dietetic Association (2000) Nutrition and you: trends 2000: what do Americans think, need, expect? J Am Diet Assoc 100(6):626–627

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beckley JH, Paredes D et al (2012) Product innovation toolbox: a field guide to consumer understanding and research. Wiley, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Belton P (2001) Chance, risk, uncertainty and food. Trends Food Sci Technol 12:32–35

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bord RJ, O'Conner RF (1989) Who wants irradiated food? Untangling complex public opinion. Food Technol 43:87

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruhn CM (1995) Consumer attitudes and market response to irradiated food. J Food Prot 58(2):175–181

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruhn CM, Mason A (2002) Community leader response to educational information about biotechnology. J Food Sci 67:399–403

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Butz P, Needs EC et al (2003) Consumer attitudes to high pressure food processing. Food Agric Environ 1(1):30–34

    Google Scholar 

  • Cardello A (2003) Consumer concerns and expectations about novel food processing technologies: effects on product liking. Appetite 40:217–233

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cardello AV, Schutz HG et al (2007) Consumer perceptions of foods processed by innovative and emerging technologies: a conjoint analytic study. Innov Food Sci Emerg Technol 8:73–83

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Center for Media and Public Affairs (2004) Food for thought V research. Available from http://ific.org

  • Cogent (2006) Food biotechnology: a study of US consumer attitudinal trends, 15 Nov 2006. Available from www.ific.org

  • Delgado-Gutlerrez C, Bruhn CM (2008) Health professionals attitudes and educational needs regarding new food processing technologies. J Food Sci Ed 7:8–13

    Google Scholar 

  • Donovan RJ, Jalleh G (1999) Positively versus negatively framed product attributes: the influence of involvement. Psychol Mark 16(7):613–630

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fink A, Kosecoff J (1985) How to conduct surveys. A step by step guide. Sage Publications, Beverly Hills, CA

    Google Scholar 

  • Fischhoff B, Brewer N et al (2011) Information and persuasion. In: Communicating risks and benefits: an evidence-based user’s guide food and drug administration. Available from http://www.fda.gov/scienceresearch/specialtopics/riskcommunication/default.htm

  • Food Marketing Institute (1998) Consumers’ views on food irradiation. Food Marketing Institute and Grocery Manufacturers of America, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Food Marketing Institute (2005) U.S. grocery shopper trends. Food Marketing Institute, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Food Marketing Institute (2008) U.S. grocery shopper trends 2008. Food Marketing Institute, Arlington, VA

    Google Scholar 

  • Fox JA (2002) Influences on purchase of irradiated foods. Food Technol 56(11):34–37

    Google Scholar 

  • Frever LJ, Howard C et al (1997) Consumer attitudes toward different food-processing technologies used in cheese production—The influence of consumer benefit. Food Qual Prefer 8:271–280

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frewer L, Howard C et al (1996) What determines trust in information about food-related risks? Underlying psychological constructs. Risk Anal 16(4):473–485

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hicks DT, Pivarnik LF et al (2009) Consumer awareness and willingness to pay for high-pressure processing of ready-to-eat food. J. Food Sci Ed 8:32–38

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Information Resources Inc. (2004) Convenience benefits continue to make living easier. Times Trends. Available from http://www.gmabrands.com/publications/gmairi.cfm. Retrieved 11 Dec 2005, May

  • Information Resources Inc. (2004). The low-carb craze appears to be shifting to “less-of” foods—many are focusing on curbing calories. Times Trends. Available from http://www.gmabrands.com/publications/gmairi.cfm. Retrieved 11 Dec 2005

  • Information Resources Inc. (2004) Taste and convenience benefits are widespread, but wellness benefits are emerging as key differentiators. Times Trends. Available from http://www.gmabrands.com/publications/gmairi.cfm. Retrieved 11 Dec 2005, May

  • Information Resources Inc. (2004) Will carb-cutting rise or demise? Times Trends. Available from http://www.gmabrands.com/publications/gmairi.cfm. Retrieved Aug, 11 Dec 2005

  • Information Resources Inc. (2005) 2003–2004 food and beverage pacesetters—benefits. Times Trends. Available from http://www.gmabrands.com/publications/gmairi.cfm. Retrieved 11 Dec 2005, Mar

  • Information Resources Inc. (2005) Convenience products beyond time savings: the new face of convenience. Times Trends. Available from http://www.gmabrands.com/publications/gmairi.cfm. Retrieved 11 Dec 2007, Oct

  • Information Resources Inc. (2005). The enjoyment factor: consumers’ unwavering demand for taste, indulgence and variety. Times Trends. Available from http://www.gmabrands.com/publications/gmairi.cfm. Retrieved 11 Dec 2005, July

  • International Food Information Council Foundation (2012) Consumer perceptions of food technology survey. Available from http://www.foodinsight.org/Content/5438/FINAL%20Executive%20Summary%205-8-12.pdf

  • International Food Information Council Foundation (2012) Food & health survey. Available from http://www.foodinsight.org/Content/3840/2012%20IFIC%20Food%20and%20Health%20Survey%20Report%20of%20Findings%20(for%20website).pdf

  • Johnson AM, Reynolds AE et al (2004) Consumer attitudes toward irradiated food: 2003 vs. 1993. Food Prot Trends 24(6):408–418

    Google Scholar 

  • Krueger RA, Casey MA (2000) Focus groups. A practical guide for applied research. Sage Publications, Inc., Thousand Oaks, CA

    Google Scholar 

  • Lahteenmaki L, Grunert K et al (2002) Acceptability of genetically modified cheese presented as real product alternative. Food Qual Pref 13:523–533

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li-Cohen AE, Bruhn CM (2002) Safety of consumer handling of fresh produce from the time of purchase to the plate: a comprehensive consumer survey. J Food Prot 65(8):1287–1296

    Google Scholar 

  • McNutt K, Powers M et al (1986) Food colors, flavors, and safety: a consumer viewpoint. Food Technol 1:72–78

    Google Scholar 

  • Pew Initiative on Biotechnology (2004) Overview of findings: 2004 focus groups and polls. Available from http://pewagbiotech.org/research/2004update/overview.pdf. Retrieved 5 Jan 2009

  • Pope JL (1993) Practical marketing research, new updated edition. American Management Association, New York, NY

    Google Scholar 

  • Ragaert P, Verbeke W et al (2004) Consumer perception and choice of minimally processed vegetables and packaged fruits. Food Qual Pref 15:259–270

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Resurreccion A, Galvez F et al (1995) Consumer attitudes toward irradiated food: results of a new study. J Food Prot 58(2):193–196

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogers EM (1995) Diffusion of innovation. The Free Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogers EM, Shoemaker RF (1971) Communication of innovation. The Free Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Salant P, Dillman DA (1994) How to conduct your own survey. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Sapp SG, Harrod WJ et al (1994) Social demographic and attitudinal determinates of consumer acceptance of food irradiation. Agribusinesss 11(2):117–130

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schultz H (1994) Consumer/soldier acceptance of irradiated food. US Army Natick Research, Development and Engineering Center, Natick, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Schutz HG, Bruhn CM et al (1989) Consumer attitude toward irradiated foods—effects of labeling and benefits information. Food Technol 43(10):80–86

    Google Scholar 

  • Slovic P (1987) Perception of risk. Science 236:280–285

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Tuorila H, Cardello AV et al (1994) Antecedents and consequences of expectations related to fat-free and regular-fat foods. Appetite 23:247–263

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Williams PRD, Hammitt JK (2001) Perceived risks of conventional and organic produce: pesticides, pathogens, and natural toxins. Risk Anal 21(2):319–330

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Yeung RMW, Morris JL (2006) An empirical study of the impact of consumer perceived risk on purchase likelihood: a modeling approach. Int J Consum Stud 30(3):294–305

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yeung RMW, Yee WMS (2005) Consumer perception of food safety related risk: a multiple regression approach. J Int Food Agribusiness 17(2):195–212

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zienkewicz LSH, Penner KP (2004) Consumers’ perceptions of irradiated ground beef after education and product exposure. Food Prot Trends 24(10):740–745

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Food Science & Technology, Center for Consumer Research, University of California, Davis, Davis, CA, 95616-8598, USA

    Christine M. Bruhn Ph.D.

Authors
  1. Christine M. Bruhn Ph.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Christine M. Bruhn Ph.D. .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Dept of Food Ag Biological Engineering, CFAES Dept Food Science & Technology, Columbus, Ohio, USA

    V.M. Balasubramaniam

  2. Center for Nonthermal Processing of Food, Washington State University, Pullman, Washington, USA

    Gustavo V. Barbosa-Cánovas

  3. Formerly Unilever R&D, Bilthoven, Utrecht, The Netherlands

    Huub L.M. Lelieveld

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Bruhn, C.M. (2016). Consumer Acceptance of High-Pressure Processed Products: American Perspective. In: Balasubramaniam, V., Barbosa-Cánovas, G., Lelieveld, H. (eds) High Pressure Processing of Food. Food Engineering Series. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-3234-4_31

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation