The Influence of Consumption Context on Indulgent Versus Healthy Yoghurts: Exploring the Relationship between the Associated Emotions and the Actual Choices

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear Authors,

This is a very interesting publication on the selection of nutritionally relevant products. I think it is worth describing the yogurts that were tested by putting them in a tabular form in the appendix (of course omitting the name of the product and the manufacturer but listing the nutrition claims and other important characteristics of these products from the nutritional point of view).

Author Response

We appreciate the time and effort that you put in reviewing our manuscript and providing us with valuable comments and suggestions. We have now made substantial revisions to the manuscript following your suggestions and we feel that the manuscript has been significantly improved. Your comments are reported below and our responses and the summary of corresponding changes to the manuscript immediately follow (in italics). 

Comment 1: Dear Authors,

This is a very interesting publication on the selection of nutritionally relevant products. I think it is worth describing the yogurts that were tested by putting them in a tabular form in the appendix (of course omitting the name of the product and the manufacturer but listing the nutrition claims and other important characteristics of these products from the nutritional point of view).

Response 1: Thank you for your comment. Accordingly, we now include table 1 in the appendix that describes the nutritional claims used in the study and the sensory features of the chosen yoghurts.

Reviewer 2 Report

Sustainability Journal Review 

 

Title: The influence of consumption context on indulgent versus healthy yoghurts: Exploring the relationship between the associated emotions and the actual choices

 

Comments

·      The paper focuses on an interesting and attractive subject area in the consumption context. There are, however, minor issues that need to be addressed. Below are my comments in detail. I hope the author(s) will find these comments useful in improving the paper.

 

Introduction

·      The manuscript does a good job in developing an introduction section. The research gap and objectives are clearly stated. 

·      Minor Page3.Line91 Period is missing. 

 

Literature Review

·      The literature review section is weak. Specifically, more reinforcement is needed in the literature review section on the effects of emotion on consumer choice in the context of food consumption. 

·      Page4. Line123. There are various ranges/types of positive and negative emotions. Mention which types of positive and negative emotions the author(s) refer to. 

·      Hypothesis1 should be better supported by the existing literature. Provide evidence how emotional reactions can be affected by goal congruence. 

 

Methods

·      Page4. Line145. Briefly explain the concept of discrete choice experiment.  

·      Page4. Line147. Briefly explain the concept of random utility theory. 

Results

·      Page10. Link285. Provide rational for selecting how positive (i.e., desire, satisfied, proud, joy) and negative emotions (i.e., disgust, dissatisfied, worried, bored) are selected. 

 

Conclusion

·      Conclusion is clear. 

 

Style/Appendix  

·      The paper has a few grammatical errors.

 

 

 

Author Response

The paper focuses on an interesting and attractive subject area in the consumption context. There are, however, minor issues that need to be addressed. Below are my comments in detail. I hope the author(s) will find these comments useful in improving the paper.

We appreciate the time and effort that you put in reviewing our manuscript and providing us with valuable comments and suggestions. We have now made substantial revisions to the manuscript following your suggestions and we feel that the manuscript has been significantly improved. Your comments are reported below and our responses and the summary of corresponding changes to the manuscript immediately follow (in italics). 

Introduction

The manuscript does a good job in developing an introduction section. The research gap and objectives are clearly stated. 

Comment 1:   Minor Page3.Line91 Period is missing.

Response 1: Thank you, the period has been inserted in the end of the sentence.     

Comment 2: Literature Review

The literature review section is weak. Specifically, more reinforcement is needed in the literature review section on the effects of emotion on consumer choice in the context of food consumption. 

Response 2: We appreciate the reviewers’ comment. Accordingly, we now provide further evidence on the effects of emotion on consumer choice in the context of food consumption. These changes are reflected in the revised manuscript page 2-3, lines 68-104, which now reads:

“It is well documented that consumers’ emotional reactions differ as a function of their consumption experiences [19]. In decision-making contexts, people often anticipate how they will feel about future outcomes and use those feelings to guide their decisions [20]. Anticipated or associated emotions (named onwards) refer to the prospect of feeling positive or negative emotions after performing or not performing a behaviour (e.g., visualizing the extrinsic attributes of a product or choice) [21]. Associated emotions differ from experienced emotions in their influence on people’s behaviours in decision-making contexts, although experienced emotions partially influence anticipated emotional states [22]. Experienced emotions are immediate affective responses that arise almost instantaneously when people are in a decision-making context [23]. Although these emotions wear off fast, when they are intense, they tend to influence impulse behaviours (e.g., impulse buying) [22]. On the other hand, associated emotions are more conscious affective responses where people think about future emotional consequences based on whether or not a particular behaviour is enacted [23]. Associated emotions provide feedback on prospective behaviours and guide subsequent behaviours by commanding attention and stimulating analysis, learning, and adapting to behavioural outcomes [21–24]. Associated emotions last longer and help people to make better decisions [22]. Previous research suggests that associated emotions make an independent contribution to the prediction of behavioural intentions since people alter their behaviours based on feedback from associated emotions to obtain the preferred feedback [21,24].

Consumers’ healthy food consumption behaviours are closely related with the pursuit of long-term benefits as a return on consumers’ decisions. Hence, consumers’ behaviours are influenced more by conscious emotional responses, such as associated emotions, than immediate affective responses [25]. Associated emotions can stimulate cognitive processing (e.g., health-related information) and encourage cautious choices (e.g., eating healthy foods). Previous research has identified that associated emotions are stronger predictors of behaviours compared to experienced emotions [26] and promote safer choices as well [27].

Positive and negative are considered important emotions in healthy food consumption contexts since consumers generally have two conflicting food consumption values: the utilitarian value of staying healthy and the hedonic value of enjoyment [28–30]. Negative emotions arise during an unpleasant emotional state. For example, feelings of guilt and/or worried stem from the belief that one thinks that he/she is doing something wrong or undesirable [28]. Hence, these feelings result from an individual’s knowledge that he/she is acting against their own moral or ethical standards [31]. When consumers feel negative emotions about a food product, this experience is perceived in the individual’s memory along with other cues (e.g., current emotions, personal interest in health concerns, or type of food) and influences their actions in similar situations. These associated negative emotions (e.g., guilt, worried, dissatisfied, bored) may steer a person away from certain behaviours, such as eating indulgent or junk food [23]. Conversely, positive emotions (e.g., pleasure, proud, joy, desire, satisfaction) are part of a pleased, happy, and delighted emotional state. In a food consumption context, these emotions can stem from the oro-sensory stimulation of eating food (e.g., taste or palatability), satisfying one’s hunger [32], or achieving one’s diet goals, especially in a health priming consumption context [30].”

Comment 3: Page4. Line123. There are various ranges/types of positive and negative emotions. Mention which types of positive and negative emotions the author(s) refer to. 

Response 3: Thank you for this comment. We now provide the types of emotion in the revised manuscript (Page 5, lines 155-157), which now reads:

“Regarding the associated emotions, previous research suggests that consumers reveal mostly positive (e.g., pleasure, desire, joy, satisfaction) rather than negative (e.g., guilt, worried, boredom, dissatisfaction) associated emotions in response to food products [44,45],…”

Comment 4:  Hypothesis1 should be better supported by the existing literature. Provide evidence how emotional reactions can be affected by goal congruence. 

Response 4: Thank you for this comment. We now provide further supporting literature for H1. Please see the changes in the revised manuscript (Page 5, lines 155-178), which now read:

“Regarding the associated emotions, previous research suggests that consumers reveal mostly positive (e.g., pleasure, desire, joy, satisfaction) rather than negative (e.g., guilt, worried, boredom, dissatisfaction) associated emotions in response to food products [44,45], and these associated emotions on foods depend on consumers’ goals [17,18]. More precisely, the study of Kim et al. (2013) [46] in a healthy food consumption context, found that the perceived healthiness of a restaurant’s food menu (e.g., nutritionally balanced diet, low in calories, fresh, organic, and healthy cooking methods) increased consumers’ pleasure regarding the visit, although they perceived the healthy food as less tasty compared to conventional food. When people are asked to think about associated positive emotions (pleasure), this compromise would be strengthened since associated emotions stimulate cognitive processing, which leads to more advisable outcomes or behaviours (e.g., health benefits). Thus, in a healthy food consumption context, associated positive emotions from health benefits are more important than taste. These associated emotions may influence which actions to take [23,30], resulting in positive behavioural intentions (e.g., purchase intentions or choice).

When consumers view healthy food alternatives, a cognitive process based on intrinsic (e.g., goals) and extrinsic (e.g., nutritional claims) cues generate consumers’ perceptions of the healthiness of the food items. In a healthy food consumption context, the cognitive response of perceived healthiness influences the affective response of associated emotions and the goal congruence of staying healthy [25]. Consumers may infer associated emotional outcomes from their evaluation of the healthiness of the food and the consequences of consuming it (i.e., whether it is in congruence with their long-term goal of staying healthy or not). When consumers who want to stay healthy, positively evaluate the healthiness of promoted healthy food extrinsic cues, associated positive emotions increase [25]. In other words, increased healthiness may relieve feelings that an individual is in the “right” direction of achieving a long-term goal (e.g., staying healthy). Likewise, if consumers perceive that the extrinsic information of a food product is healthier, the associated positive emotions increase. A positive evaluation of food healthiness makes people feel like they are doing the right thing [25].”

Comment 5: Methods

Page4. Line145. Briefly explain the concept of discrete choice experiment.  

Page4. Line147. Briefly explain the concept of random utility theory. 

Response 5: Thank you for this comment. We now briefly explain the concept of the discrete choice experiment in the revised manuscript (page 6, lines 198-206) and also the concept of the random utility theory (page 6, lines 206-209), which now read:

“The DCE is based on the consumer theory of utility maximization [48], where the total utility depends on the characteristics of the product. DCEs are one of the most popular stated-preference methods used in consumer behaviour to investigate individuals’ preferences for a certain good or service because they evaluate different attributes and levels simultaneously. Moreover, this approach is similar to a real purchasing situation where consumers are asked to make trade-offs between products characterized by different attributes [49]. DCEs provide several hypothetical purchasing scenarios. In each scenario, participants are asked to make choices between alternatives that represent products with different attributes and levels with a no-buy option. The familiarity of the decision mechanism in a DCE is one of the main advantages of this approach. Lastly, the DCE has strong foundation with the economic theory of Lancaster microeconomic approach [48] and the Random Utility Theory (RUT) of McFadden (1973) [50], which both assume that individuals are rational and make choices to maximize their utility derived from the attributes that a good possesses taking into account their budget constraint.”

Comment 6: Results

• Page10. Link285. Provide rational for selecting how positive (i.e., desire, satisfied, proud, joy) and negative emotions (i.e., disgust, dissatisfied, worried, bored) are selected. 

Response 6: Thank you for this comment. We selected these emotions since they were part of the PrEmo2 tool shown in figure 3 in the manuscript. We describe the selecting procedure in footnote 4. The rationale for selecting positive and negative emotions for our dummy variable relies on the definition of these emotions on the PrEmo2 tool.

Conclusion

• Conclusion is clear. 

Style/Appendix  

Comment 7:  The paper has a few grammatical errors.

Response 7: Thank you for this comment. All grammatical errors were screened and corrected.

Reviewer 3 Report

I find the subject matter very interesting. The methodology used and the procedure carried out is clear and responds to the three hypotheses of the research article.

I would just like to point out that it would be more appropriate if the participants were more balanced since in their work there is a majority of females as opposed to males, as they indicate "Participants were older than 18 years (mean = 28.7), with 66% females. All consumed yoghurts (see 164 Table 1 for the sociodemographic details)". They could also explicitly state how many are male and how many are female. This is suggested so that the work could have real gender parity.

Otherwise, congratulations, it is a good job.

Author Response

We appreciate the time and effort that you put in reviewing our manuscript and providing us with valuable comments and suggestions. We have now made substantial revisions to the manuscript following your suggestions and we feel that the manuscript has been significantly improved. Your comments are reported below and our responses and the summary of corresponding changes to the manuscript immediately follow (in italics). 

Comment 1: I find the subject matter very interesting. The methodology used and the procedure carried out is clear and responds to the three hypotheses of the research article.

I would just like to point out that it would be more appropriate if the participants were more balanced since in their work there is a majority of females as opposed to males, as they indicate "Participants were older than 18 years (mean = 28.7), with 66% females. All consumed yoghurts (see 164 Table 1 for the sociodemographic details)". They could also explicitly state how many are male and how many are female. This is suggested so that the work could have real gender parity.

Response 1: Thank you for your comment. Accordingly, we now provide an explanation of the possible unbalanced sample based on gender in the revised manuscript (page 6, lines 225-284), which now reads:

“Participants were older than 18 years (mean = 28.7), with 66% females (n=137) and 34% males (n=72). It would have been more appropriate to have a sample balanced based on gender. However, having more females than males might be expected since it is demonstrated that women are more likely to participate in surveys than men [56].”

Otherwise, congratulations, it is a good job.

Reviewer 4 Report

The research is theoretically well-founded, methodologically correct prepared and conducted. The research results are well presented. The conclusions are argued. The methodological remark refers to the control group. According to the paper (195 - 196) "the participants in the control group were
As in all similar research, the respondents' awareness of participating in the experiment may influence their decisions and choices. For example, if the respondent participates in a related experiment. in addition to healthy food, awareness of this may bring the preferred choice closer to what is perceived as healthy food.Self-deception theory is well known.It would be good for the authors to comment on this statement.

Author Response

We appreciate the time and effort that you put in reviewing our manuscript and providing us with valuable comments and suggestions. We have now made substantial revisions to the manuscript following your suggestions and we feel that the manuscript has been significantly improved. Your comments are reported below and our responses and the summary of corresponding changes to the manuscript immediately follow (in italics). 

Comment 1: The research is theoretically well-founded, methodologically correct prepared and conducted. The research results are well presented. The conclusions are argued. The methodological remark refers to the control group. According to the paper (195 - 196) "the participants in the control group were
As in all similar research, the respondents' awareness of participating in the experiment may influence their decisions and choices. For example, if the respondent participates in a related experiment. in addition to healthy food, awareness of this may bring the preferred choice closer to what is perceived as healthy food. Self-deception theory is well known. It would be good for the authors to comment on this statement.

Response 1: Thank you for this comment. We use hypothetical methods in our survey, therefore, believe that there is no presence of self-deception. Self-deception is a personality trait and an independent mental state, it involves a combination of a conscious motivational false belief and a contradictory unconscious real belief (von Hippel and Trivers, 2011). We did not ask our participants to imagine a false belief but imagine an existing true experience (purchase in the supermarket). We agree that our survey might have socially desirable biased answers, and mention this in our limitations (page 16, lines 478-479).

von Hippel, W., and Trivers, R. (2011). The evolution and psychology of self-deception. Behav. Brain Sci. 34, 1–56. doi: 10.1017/S0140525X10001354

Reviewer 5 Report

I read the work submitted for review with pleasure. It is competently carried out and well described. English is used properly. The research results are, in my opinion, briefly described, but legible and accurate. The only thing missing is a more explicit reference to the H1 hypothesis.

Author Response

We appreciate the time and effort that you put in reviewing our manuscript and providing us with valuable comments and suggestions. We have now made substantial revisions to the manuscript following your suggestions and we feel that the manuscript has been significantly improved. Your comments are reported below and our responses and the summary of corresponding changes to the manuscript immediately follow (in italics). 

Comment 1: I read the work submitted for review with pleasure. It is competently carried out and well described. English is used properly. The research results are, in my opinion, briefly described, but legible and accurate. The only thing missing is a more explicit reference to the H1 hypothesis.

Response 1: Thank you for this comment. We now accordingly have provided more evidence regarding H1 in the revised manuscript (page 5, lines 155-180), which now reads:

“Regarding the associated emotions, previous research suggests that consumers reveal mostly positive (e.g., pleasure, desire, joy, satisfaction) rather than negative (e.g., guilt, worried, boredom, dissatisfaction) associated emotions in response to food products [44,45], and these associated emotions on foods depend on consumers’ goals [17,18]. More precisely, the study of Kim et al. (2013) [46] in a healthy food consumption context, found that the perceived healthiness of a restaurant’s food menu (e.g., nutritionally balanced diet, low in calories, fresh, organic, and healthy cooking methods) increased consumers’ pleasure regarding the visit, although they perceived the healthy food as less tasty compared to conventional food. When people are asked to think about associated positive emotions (pleasure), this compromise would be strengthened since associated emotions stimulate cognitive processing, which leads to more advisable outcomes or behaviours (e.g., health benefits). Thus, in a healthy food consumption context, associated positive emotions from health benefits are more important than taste. These associated emotions may influence which actions to take [23,30], resulting in positive behavioural intentions (e.g., purchase intentions or choice).

When consumers view healthy food alternatives, a cognitive process based on intrinsic (e.g., goals) and extrinsic (e.g., nutritional claims) cues generate consumers’ perceptions of the healthiness of the food items. In a healthy food consumption context, the cognitive response of perceived healthiness influences the affective response of associated emotions and the goal congruence of staying healthy [25]. Consumers may infer associated emotional outcomes from their evaluation of the healthiness of the food and the consequences of consuming it (i.e., whether it is in congruence with their long-term goal of staying healthy or not). When consumers who want to stay healthy, positively evaluate the healthiness of promoted healthy food extrinsic cues, associated positive emotions increase [25]. In other words, increased healthiness may relieve feelings that an individual is in the “right” direction of achieving a long-term goal (e.g., staying healthy). Likewise, if consumers perceive that the extrinsic information of a food product is healthier, the associated positive emotions increase. A positive evaluation of food healthiness makes people feel like they are doing the right thing [25]. Based on these notions, the present study hypothesizes an increase in positive rather than negative associated emotions when the product version matches with an individual’s consumption context (health versus indulgent) (H1).”