26 Testing consumer responses to new packaging concepts L. Lahteenmaki and A. arvola, VTT Biotechnology, Finland 26.1 Introduction: new packaging techniques and the consumer New packaging techniques promise consumers safe food products that keep their high quality throughout shelf-life. The improved quality has been achieved by applying tailored technological solutions that require highly specialised knowl edge. From consumers' point of view these new techniques require explanations if food can keep fresh for an unexpected and thereby unnaturally long time Consumers in general tend to be suspicious towards novelty in food products as any new element can be potentially harmful(Rozin and Royzman, 2001) Furthermore, applying technology to achieve benefits can add to distrust as technology by itself can have negative connotations. Understanding how the benefits have been achieved requires advanced consumer education on the principles of food spoilage The basic functions of the package have been described as containing the foodstuff, protecting and maintaining its quality, providing information for the consumer, convenience in use, being environmentally friendly, and selling the product(Hurme et al., 2002). For consumers, the favourable packaging attributes include convenience in opening, resealing, storing and disposing (Eastlack et al., 1993, Mikkola et al., 1997). These positive attributes are almost all related to the practical properties of packages and how easy they are to use but include no safety issues. Similarly, most negative attributes referred to lack of convenience, the only safety related attributes listed were ' product spoils easily'and can spill or leak'(Eastlack et al, 1993) Most active and intelligent packaging methods aim at improving the quality nd safety of food products. The improvement of safety by producing longer
26.1 Introduction: new packaging techniques and the consumer New packaging techniques promise consumers safe food products that keep their high quality throughout shelf-life. The improved quality has been achieved by applying tailored technological solutions that require highly specialised knowledge. From consumers’ point of view these new techniques require explanations if food can keep fresh for an unexpected and thereby unnaturally long time. Consumers in general tend to be suspicious towards novelty in food products as any new element can be potentially harmful (Rozin and Royzman, 2001). Furthermore, applying technology to achieve benefits can add to distrust as technology by itself can have negative connotations. Understanding how the benefits have been achieved requires advanced consumer education on the principles of food spoilage. The basic functions of the package have been described as containing the foodstuff, protecting and maintaining its quality, providing information for the consumer, convenience in use, being environmentally friendly, and selling the product (Hurme et al., 2002). For consumers, the favourable packaging attributes include convenience in opening, resealing, storing and disposing (Eastlack et al., 1993; Mikkola et al., 1997). These positive attributes are almost all related to the practical properties of packages and how easy they are to use, but include no safety issues. Similarly, most negative attributes referred to lack of convenience, the only safety related attributes listed were ‘product spoils easily’ and ‘can spill or leak’ (Eastlack et al., 1993). Most active and intelligent packaging methods aim at improving the quality and safety of food products. The improvement of safety by producing longer 26 Testing consumer responses to new packaging concepts L. La¨hteenma¨ki and A. Arvola, VTT Biotechnology, Finland
Testing consumer responses to new packaging concepts 551 safe shelf-life may be a hard concept to sell to consumers. Safety is likely to be for consumers a self-evident feature and therefore regarded as a basic requirement in packed food products. Therefore, consumers do not assess the package based on its safety merits, rather they assess the convenience of using the pack when taking the presumably safe foodstuff from the package. Th implies that consumers need to be educated about the possible benefits that active and intelligent packaging can provide them and treating the different types of packaging solutions as integral parts of the product rather than the foodstuff and packaging as separate issues. Although active and intelligent ackaging methods have been studied widely and innovations have been developed very few of them have been developed into commercially available products( Hurme et al, 2002). One reason for the slow progress may have been the anticipated consumer concerns of these new applications. Surprisingly, however, very few consumer studies have been published on this topic This chapter describes how different approaches can be used to study consumers'attitudes towards active and intelligent packaging technology. The first section calls attention to the special problems that are encountered when novel technologies are studied. Then the principles of most frequently used qualitative and quantitative methods are introduced and their strengths and weaknesses are discussed a short overview of our current knowledge on consumer attitudes towards active and intelligent packaging will follow the methodological section. The few studies carried out have mostly dealt with consumers'attitudes towards oxygen absorbers and time-temperature indicators The last section in this chapter will discuss the future prospects of active and intelligent packaging from a consumer standpoint; what the issues are that need to be taken into account and how to approach possible consumer concerns 26.2 Special problems in testing responses to new packaging The novelty aspect and the fact that food products are regarded as entities including both package and foodstuff create challenges for studying consumer responses to new packaging technologies. When asked about familiar issues consumers tend to have either positive or negative attitudes that are activated by asking questions related to them. This process depends on the importance and topicality of the subject. Information on important or on relevant matters are given more attention and the belief structures tend to be more complex for relevant than for non-relevant issues. Recent exposure to the topic, on the other hand, makes the beliefs more accessible. When required to give answers about new food products or technologies these responses can be very arbitrary. People give responses although they are not sure what the question actually involves since this is the socially most appropriate and easiest way of handling questions The issues that come out are highly dependent on the associations these new technologies create in consumers' minds and what other matters are relevant for ler at the time
safe shelf-life may be a hard concept to sell to consumers. Safety is likely to be for consumers a self-evident feature and therefore regarded as a basic requirement in packed food products. Therefore, consumers do not assess the package based on its safety merits, rather they assess the convenience of using the pack when taking the presumably safe foodstuff from the package. This implies that consumers need to be educated about the possible benefits that active and intelligent packaging can provide them and treating the different types of packaging solutions as integral parts of the product rather than the foodstuff and packaging as separate issues. Although active and intelligent packaging methods have been studied widely and innovations have been developed very few of them have been developed into commercially available products (Hurme et al., 2002). One reason for the slow progress may have been the anticipated consumer concerns of these new applications. Surprisingly, however, very few consumer studies have been published on this topic. This chapter describes how different approaches can be used to study consumers’ attitudes towards active and intelligent packaging technology. The first section calls attention to the special problems that are encountered when novel technologies are studied. Then the principles of most frequently used qualitative and quantitative methods are introduced and their strengths and weaknesses are discussed. A short overview of our current knowledge on consumer attitudes towards active and intelligent packaging will follow the methodological section. The few studies carried out have mostly dealt with consumers’ attitudes towards oxygen absorbers and time-temperature indicators. The last section in this chapter will discuss the future prospects of active and intelligent packaging from a consumer standpoint; what the issues are that need to be taken into account and how to approach possible consumer concerns. 26.2 Special problems in testing responses to new packaging The novelty aspect and the fact that food products are regarded as entities including both package and foodstuff create challenges for studying consumer responses to new packaging technologies. When asked about familiar issues consumers tend to have either positive or negative attitudes that are activated by asking questions related to them. This process depends on the importance and topicality of the subject. Information on important or on relevant matters are given more attention and the belief structures tend to be more complex for relevant than for non-relevant issues. Recent exposure to the topic, on the other hand, makes the beliefs more accessible. When required to give answers about new food products or technologies these responses can be very arbitrary. People give responses although they are not sure what the question actually involves since this is the socially most appropriate and easiest way of handling questions. The issues that come out are highly dependent on the associations these new technologies create in consumers’ minds and what other matters are relevant for the consumer at the time. Testing consumer responses to new packaging concepts 551
552 Novel food packaging techniques In order to gain meaningful responses, consumers need to be made more familiar with intelligent packaging. This can be done by explaining what a oncept, whether active packaging or special indicator, means or by showing concrete examples of these active or intelligent package solutions. A simple way to explain to interviewees what the applications are and how they function is a set of photographs that are easy to take to different places. Furthermore, they are the same for all interviewees regardless of the time and location. If real food packages or indicators are used, they have to be replaced at each demonstration This will raise the expenses of the study, not to mention the amount of products that need to be carried to different locations and stored at accurate temperatures Modern technology makes it possible to carry out research by using the internet or computer-aided data collection systems. With these applications it is possible to demonstrate how the indicators work with no need to use actual food packages as samples The most feasible way of demonstrating these package solutions is to show food products with and without the indicators, absorbers or emitters. The responses are then related both to the example food and the packaging technology. This raises the question whether packaging technologies can be studied separately from their applications in consumer studies, as they provide improvements for the quality of food, not improvements for packaging. For consumer acceptance the perceived benefits are important. Consumers will assess the benefits they gain, but they also have concerns about how these benefits have been achieved. Furthermore, any technology that solely provides advantages for the other actors in the food chain are not easily accepted by consumers especially if they raise prices 26.3 Methods for testing consumer responses The central objective in consumer research is to find out whether consumers are willing to accept new packaging technologies, whether there are concerns that may obstruct or delay acceptance and how the benefits provided by the ne technologies are perceived. The methods used can be broadly divided into two categories; qualitative and quantitative approaches With qualitative methods we can get systematic information about how consumers think and formulate their opinions about food and packaging related issues. These techniques are valuable when we want to gather information about the different possible concerns consumers attach to novel technologies or we want to define what the reasoning is behind these concerns. The advantage of qualitative techniques is that consumers can use their own language and expressions to describe their opinions. Often qualitative techniques are used as pilot studies for quantitative approaches, but they are gaining value as independent tools. The most frequently used qualitative methods are focus group discussion and individual interviews Both these types of methods can be applied with different techniques depending on the question on the hand
In order to gain meaningful responses, consumers need to be made more familiar with intelligent packaging. This can be done by explaining what a concept, whether active packaging or special indicator, means or by showing concrete examples of these active or intelligent package solutions. A simple way to explain to interviewees what the applications are and how they function is a set of photographs that are easy to take to different places. Furthermore, they are the same for all interviewees regardless of the time and location. If real food packages or indicators are used, they have to be replaced at each demonstration. This will raise the expenses of the study, not to mention the amount of products that need to be carried to different locations and stored at accurate temperatures. Modern technology makes it possible to carry out research by using the internet or computer-aided data collection systems. With these applications it is possible to demonstrate how the indicators work with no need to use actual food packages as samples. The most feasible way of demonstrating these package solutions is to show food products with and without the indicators, absorbers or emitters. The responses are then related both to the example food and the packaging technology. This raises the question whether packaging technologies can be studied separately from their applications in consumer studies, as they provide improvements for the quality of food, not improvements for packaging. For consumer acceptance the perceived benefits are important. Consumers will assess the benefits they gain, but they also have concerns about how these benefits have been achieved. Furthermore, any technology that solely provides advantages for the other actors in the food chain are not easily accepted by consumers especially if they raise prices. 26.3 Methods for testing consumer responses The central objective in consumer research is to find out whether consumers are willing to accept new packaging technologies, whether there are concerns that may obstruct or delay acceptance and how the benefits provided by the new technologies are perceived. The methods used can be broadly divided into two categories; qualitative and quantitative approaches. With qualitative methods we can get systematic information about how consumers think and formulate their opinions about food and packaging related issues. These techniques are valuable when we want to gather information about the different possible concerns consumers attach to novel technologies or we want to define what the reasoning is behind these concerns. The advantage of qualitative techniques is that consumers can use their own language and expressions to describe their opinions. Often qualitative techniques are used as pilot studies for quantitative approaches, but they are gaining value as independent tools. The most frequently used qualitative methods are focus group discussion and individual interviews. Both these types of methods can be applied with different techniques depending on the question on the hand. 552 Novel food packaging techniques
Testing consumer responses to new packaging concepts 553 Qualitative methods describe how consumers think about certain issues but hey do not give the frequency of these ideas or how important the ideas are to different people. Quantitative methods are used when we want to find out how many people have a certain opinion or estimate the strength of an opinion. The quantitative surveys finding out peoples opinions can be carried out as interviews or questionnaires or a combination of these. Experimental designs are a special type of quantitative study in which respondents are given different treatments e.g., samples to try, and their responses are measured and compared in different experimental groups or with a control group. Below are short descriptions of typical features of most typically used methods and implications of their use in studying novel packaging materials. Detailed descriptions of the methods can be found in textbooks 26.3.1 Focus group discussions Focus group discussions provide information on how consumers talk about particular issues(Casey and Krueger, 1994). Moderating focus groups require careful preparation and the questions need to be outlined beforehand. The moderator needs to be well-trained for the task and possess appropriate social skills on diplomacy and bringing all participants into discussion as equal members of the group. The basic principle is that the moderator does not lead the discussion in any specific direction, as long as the conversation remains topical. The participants in the discussion group respond with comments and opinions from each other and thus the discussion deals with aspects coming from several individuals. This social interaction enables the pondering of the importance of matters that have been raised during the discussion. Analysing the focus group data is a relatively difficult task because the material produced during interactive discussions tends to be vast d branch in various directions. Due to this heterogeneity of material Casey and Krueger(1994)recommend that at least three groups with the same questions and similar participants should be run to cover the varia Where packaging issues are concerned focus group discussion works well with consumers because new technologies can be demonstrated as part of the group and there is no pressure to be an expert on the topic. Experts working for food industry, authority or consumer associations may find group discussion less relaxing than consumers, since these individuals should be knowledgeable about the novel packaging developments. This may cause tension a group discussion. If the aim in discussion is a free exchange of ideas and views about the future, tension may exclude some participants from the discussion or ideas and opinions are carefully controlled. Therefore respondents with vested interests in the topic are easier to handle in a one-to-one interview situation 26.3. 2 Qualitative and quantitative interviews Interviews allow direct interaction between respondent and interviewer Individual interviews can be carried out using several techniques. Some
Qualitative methods describe how consumers think about certain issues but they do not give the frequency of these ideas or how important the ideas are to different people. Quantitative methods are used when we want to find out how many people have a certain opinion or estimate the strength of an opinion. The quantitative surveys finding out people’s opinions can be carried out as interviews or questionnaires or a combination of these. Experimental designs are a special type of quantitative study in which respondents are given different treatments, e.g., samples to try, and their responses are measured and compared in different experimental groups or with a control group. Below are short descriptions of typical features of most typically used methods and implications of their use in studying novel packaging materials. Detailed descriptions of the methods can be found in textbooks. 26.3.1 Focus group discussions Focus group discussions provide information on how consumers talk about particular issues (Casey and Krueger, 1994). Moderating focus groups require careful preparation and the questions need to be outlined beforehand. The moderator needs to be well-trained for the task and possess appropriate social skills on diplomacy and bringing all participants into discussion as equal members of the group. The basic principle is that the moderator does not lead the discussion in any specific direction, as long as the conversation remains topical. The participants in the discussion group respond with comments and opinions from each other and thus the discussion deals with aspects coming from several individuals. This social interaction enables the pondering of the importance of matters that have been raised during the discussion. Analysing the focus group data is a relatively difficult task because the material produced during interactive discussions tends to be vast and branch in various directions. Due to this heterogeneity of material Casey and Krueger (1994) recommend that at least three groups with the same questions and similar participants should be run to cover the variation. Where packaging issues are concerned focus group discussion works well with consumers because new technologies can be demonstrated as part of the group session and there is no pressure to be an expert on the topic. Experts working for retailers, food industry, authority or consumer associations may find group discussion less relaxing than consumers, since these individuals should be knowledgeable about the novel packaging developments. This may cause tension in a group discussion. If the aim in discussion is a free exchange of ideas and views about the future, tension may exclude some participants from the discussion or ideas and opinions are carefully controlled. Therefore respondents with vested interests in the topic are easier to handle in a one-to-one interview situation. 26.3.2 Qualitative and quantitative interviews Interviews allow direct interaction between respondent and interviewer. Individual interviews can be carried out using several techniques. Some Testing consumer responses to new packaging concepts 553
554 Novel food packaging techniques techniques follow very structured procedures with a predefined order and form of questions; others allow an interviewees responses to delineate how to continue as long as the relevant topics are discussed. The type of interview is typically selected on the basis of research questions. Packaging issues are rarely sensitive issues and are therefore easy to talk about. Often in this type of stud either semi-structured or structured interviews have been used Qualitative interviews are used when we want know how respondents think about packaging and we do not have enough previous knowledge about what the possible responses can be. The approach is suitable for examining more complex issues as participants are not restricted in predefined response alternatives. Data analysis with a qualitative approach tends to be time consuming and the researcher has to be very skilful in analysing transcripts of focus group If we want to quantify responses the interviews are typically carried out with structured outlines and sometime the possible response alternatives are preselected. The advantage of carrying out an interview survey rather than a questionnaire is that interviewees can ask for explanations if they do not understand questions and also interviewers can ask for elaboration if the responses contain ambiguous expressions. With novel packaging solutions, using interviews enables a demonstration of what these absorbers and indicators are like when they are attached to the food package 26.3.3 Questionnaires Questionnaires offer a relatively inexpensive method to study what people think about an issue on average. a questionnaire approach can be selected if we know well enough what the possible response alternatives are that consumers are likely to give or we have an explicit predefined question. With appropriate sampling techniques the respondents can be selected to fulfil certain predefined criteria. Typically respondents are selected based on their socio-demographic background(sex, age, education, profession) or based on their consumption or buying habits. Often food-related studies are targeted on those who typically use the product or questions are asked of those who have the main responsibility for food choice in their own household. Due to the latter criterion, the majority of the food or packaging related studies have had mostly female respondents(Anon, 1991; Korhonen et al., 1999, Mikkola et a1,1997) The limitation of questionnaires in packaging related research is that items in a questionnaire should refer to familiar things. If consumers are asked opinions about themes they are not familiar with, the reliability and validity of these responses may not be very good. There are several textbooks describing how to construct a questionnaire and ask factual and attitudinal questions, but the basic rule is that the questions should be easily comprehensible and provide alternatives that mers can relate to
techniques follow very structured procedures with a predefined order and form of questions; others allow an interviewee’s responses to delineate how to continue as long as the relevant topics are discussed. The type of interview is typically selected on the basis of research questions. Packaging issues are rarely sensitive issues and are therefore easy to talk about. Often in this type of study either semi-structured or structured interviews have been used. Qualitative interviews are used when we want know how respondents think about packaging and we do not have enough previous knowledge about what the possible responses can be. The approach is suitable for examining more complex issues as participants are not restricted in predefined response alternatives. Data analysis with a qualitative approach tends to be time consuming and the researcher has to be very skilful in analysing transcripts of focus group discussions. If we want to quantify responses the interviews are typically carried out with structured outlines and sometime the possible response alternatives are preselected. The advantage of carrying out an interview survey rather than a questionnaire is that interviewees can ask for explanations if they do not understand questions and also interviewers can ask for elaboration if the responses contain ambiguous expressions. With novel packaging solutions, using interviews enables a demonstration of what these absorbers and indicators are like when they are attached to the food package. 26.3.3 Questionnaires Questionnaires offer a relatively inexpensive method to study what people think about an issue on average. A questionnaire approach can be selected if we know well enough what the possible response alternatives are that consumers are likely to give or we have an explicit predefined question. With appropriate sampling techniques the respondents can be selected to fulfil certain predefined criteria. Typically respondents are selected based on their socio-demographic background (sex, age, education, profession) or based on their consumption or buying habits. Often food-related studies are targeted on those who typically use the product or questions are asked of those who have the main responsibility for food choice in their own household. Due to the latter criterion, the majority of the food or packaging related studies have had mostly female respondents (Anon., 1991; Korhonen et al., 1999; Mikkola et al., 1997). The limitation of questionnaires in packaging related research is that items in a questionnaire should refer to familiar things. If consumers are asked opinions about themes they are not familiar with, the reliability and validity of these responses may not be very good. There are several textbooks describing how to construct a questionnaire and ask factual and attitudinal questions, but the basic rule is that the questions should be easily comprehensible and provide alternatives that consumers can relate to. 554 Novel food packaging techniques
Testing consumer responses to new packaging concepts 555 26.3. 4 Experimental designs Experimental designs are useful when novel applications in the food domain are studied as they provide a chance to familiarise the respondents with the new technologies and thus reduce fears that rise from uncertainty. The designs also enable controlled comparisons of consumer responses to different types of packaging solutions. Consumers can experience concretely how indicators or absorbers look and function and what their advantages are In most experimental set-ups there is a need for a control product, which is often the same product packed without the indicator or other active component. This enables a direct comparison of how acceptable the new applications are in relation to the existing packaging methods. As most consumer responses tend to be relative, the experimental design can produce more reliable information in this sense although the drawback is that instructions tend to make the assessments rather artificial 26.4 Consumer attitudes towards active and intelligent packaging 26.4.1 General attitudes The idea of active and intelligent packaging has received a generally positive response from consumers and their representatives. The reason may be that they seem to provide solutions to consumer concerns. According to Korhonen et al. (1999)about half of Finnish respondents(n=460)did not trust that all food products would still be edible on their expiry date. Half of the consumers also reported that they would choose packages from the bottom of a chilled counter to ensure the freshness of the product. The active and intelligent packaging methods were more familiar to those who were involved with packaging issues A small number of individuals(n=21) who are responsible for delivering information to consumers about the packaging issues in Finland were interviewed in 1995(Mikkola et al, 1997). The group consisted of retailers journalists and government officials. When asked whether they were familiar with modified atmosphere and vacuum packs, four out of five interviewees could recognise both of these. Furthermore, about half of the respondents could recognise moisture absorbers (57%), oxygen absorbers (52%)and time temperature indicators(42%). The interviewees had a positive attitude towards these examples of active and intelligent packaging, especially if applied to foods that are easily perishable, such as chilled foods, vegetables, some bakery products, meat or fish products tin People have different requirements for food packaging. In a study carried out the UK(Anon, 1991)consumers could be divided into three e groups according to their attitudes towards the safety of chilled foods. The ultra- cautious'are likely to throw away all foods that have passed the use by date, the cautious' use their own judgement and believe in some safety margins around the given dates, whereas the non-cautious' care very little about dates. A
26.3.4 Experimental designs Experimental designs are useful when novel applications in the food domain are studied as they provide a chance to familiarise the respondents with the new technologies and thus reduce fears that rise from uncertainty. The designs also enable controlled comparisons of consumer responses to different types of packaging solutions. Consumers can experience concretely how indicators or absorbers look and function and what their advantages are. In most experimental set-ups there is a need for a control product, which is often the same product packed without the indicator or other active component. This enables a direct comparison of how acceptable the new applications are in relation to the existing packaging methods. As most consumer responses tend to be relative, the experimental design can produce more reliable information in this sense, although the drawback is that instructions tend to make the assessments rather artificial. 26.4 Consumer attitudes towards active and intelligent packaging 26.4.1 General attitudes The idea of active and intelligent packaging has received a generally positive response from consumers and their representatives. The reason may be that they seem to provide solutions to consumer concerns. According to Korhonen et al. (1999) about half of Finnish respondents (n 460) did not trust that all food products would still be edible on their expiry date. Half of the consumers also reported that they would choose packages from the bottom of a chilled counter to ensure the freshness of the product. The active and intelligent packaging methods were more familiar to those who were involved with packaging issues. A small number of individuals (n 21) who are responsible for delivering information to consumers about the packaging issues in Finland were interviewed in 1995 (Mikkola et al., 1997). The group consisted of retailers, journalists and government officials. When asked whether they were familiar with modified atmosphere and vacuum packs, four out of five interviewees could recognise both of these. Furthermore, about half of the respondents could recognise moisture absorbers (57%), oxygen absorbers (52%) and timetemperature indicators (42%). The interviewees had a positive attitude towards these examples of active and intelligent packaging, especially if applied to foods that are easily perishable, such as chilled foods, vegetables, some bakery products, meat or fish products. People have different requirements for food packaging. In a study carried out in the UK (Anon., 1991) consumers could be divided into three groups according to their attitudes towards the safety of chilled foods. The ‘ultracautious’ are likely to throw away all foods that have passed the use by date, the ‘cautious’ use their own judgement and believe in some safety margins around the given dates, whereas the ‘non-cautious’ care very little about dates. A Testing consumer responses to new packaging concepts 555
556 Novel food packaging considerable number of consumers fell into the ultra-cautious'category whereas the non-cautious'were in a minority. The study itself tasse Ve consumer acceptance of time-temperature indicators and reflected acceptance of these new devices to the needs these three respondent groups had 26.4.2 Acceptance of oxygen absorbers When asked about the possible benefits of absorbers or emitters, the interviewees(n=21)mentioned that food products retain their good quality longer, which may be especially helpful for small households and those who shop once a week (Mikkola et al., 1997). The absorbers were believed to improve safety by reducing microbial risks and thereby contributing to a decrease in the use of additives in food products. On the negative side, the added components can increase price and produce more waste. People also may eat older food if it keeps a longer time in good condition. Furthermore, the possibility that these absorbers or emitters could contain harmful substances that may be ingested by vulnerable consumer groups, such as older people and children caused concern Acceptance of oxygen absorbers among Finnish consumers was examined with an experimental design. Mikkola et al. (1997)carried out a study where consumers(n=346)were given two types of food products to take home. Sliced rye bread and pizza filled with ham were packed with or without oxygen absorbers. The products were stored at the research institute so that their delivery date was close to the best by date. A trained laboratory panel assessed the samples and gave higher quality points on appearance, flavour and freshness for pizza when it was packed with the absorber than when it contained no absorber, but there was no difference in the assessed quality of sliced rye bread Consumers, however, assessed both products with oxygen absorbers as having higher quality, although the difference between oxygen absorber product and conventional product was small for rye bread. In the trained panel evaluation the samples were blind coded and the panel did not know what the samples were when they tasted them. Consumers, on the other hand received the samples learly labelled and based their assessment on both sensory quality and on information they received. In addition to overall quality, respondents were asked to evaluate whether they were willing to accept the absorbers and buy these products if they were available on the market The oxygen absorber used in the study was a loose sachet enclosed in the ackage and half of the respondents also received an information leaflet that described what the oxygen absorber was, how it functioned and how it could be disposed of (Mikkola et al., 1997). After the demonstration with real food products 72% on average were ready to accept these additional sachets, 23% were unsure and 5% were clearly negative. From those who received the dditional leaflet 76% accepted the oxygen absorber vs. 67% in the no- nformation group Information decreased the number of unsure people among the respondents but had no effect on the size of the negative group
considerable number of consumers fell into the ‘ultra-cautious’ category whereas the ‘non-cautious’ were in a minority. The study itself targeted consumer acceptance of time-temperature indicators and reflected the acceptance of these new devices to the needs these three respondent groups had. 26.4.2 Acceptance of oxygen absorbers When asked about the possible benefits of absorbers or emitters, the interviewees (n 21) mentioned that food products retain their good quality longer, which may be especially helpful for small households and those who shop once a week (Mikkola et al., 1997). The absorbers were believed to improve safety by reducing microbial risks and thereby contributing to a decrease in the use of additives in food products. On the negative side, the added components can increase price and produce more waste. People also may eat older food if it keeps a longer time in good condition. Furthermore, the possibility that these absorbers or emitters could contain harmful substances that may be ingested by vulnerable consumer groups, such as older people and children, caused concern. Acceptance of oxygen absorbers among Finnish consumers was examined with an experimental design. Mikkola et al. (1997) carried out a study where consumers (n 346) were given two types of food products to take home. Sliced rye bread and pizza filled with ham were packed with or without oxygen absorbers. The products were stored at the research institute so that their delivery date was close to the best by date. A trained laboratory panel assessed the samples and gave higher quality points on appearance, flavour and freshness for pizza when it was packed with the absorber than when it contained no absorber, but there was no difference in the assessed quality of sliced rye bread. Consumers, however, assessed both products with oxygen absorbers as having higher quality, although the difference between oxygen absorber product and conventional product was small for rye bread. In the trained panel evaluation the samples were blind coded and the panel did not know what the samples were when they tasted them. Consumers, on the other hand received the samples clearly labelled and based their assessment on both sensory quality and on information they received. In addition to overall quality, respondents were asked to evaluate whether they were willing to accept the absorbers and buy these products if they were available on the market. The oxygen absorber used in the study was a loose sachet enclosed in the package and half of the respondents also received an information leaflet that described what the oxygen absorber was, how it functioned and how it could be disposed of (Mikkola et al., 1997). After the demonstration with real food products 72% on average were ready to accept these additional sachets, 23% were unsure and 5% were clearly negative. From those who received the additional leaflet 76% accepted the oxygen absorber vs. 67% in the noinformation group. Information decreased the number of unsure people among the respondents but had no effect on the size of the negative group. 556 Novel food packaging techniques
Testing consumer responses to new packaging concepts 557 Respondents'attitudes towards oxygen absorbers were positive(3.8/max 5), spondents would rather favour than avoid them(3.6/max 5)and evaluated them more necessary than unnecessary (3.4/max 5)(Mikkola et aL., 1997) Those who were most positive about oxygen absorbers were also positive about pre-packed food, use of additives and long shelf-life. When asked about the acceptance of oxygen absorbers in different types of meat products, use in pizza (62%), meatballs(48%), sausages (37%)were accepted best, while in fresh meat only 29% would accept them. The high acceptance rate in pizza illustrates the usefulness of the demonstration material in the study Consumers could experience with their own senses what the benefits in pizza were and thus the acceptance rate is high. The low acceptance rate in fresh meat indicates that an idea of prolonged shelf-life is not considered as acceptable in fresh products. In bakery products the highest acceptance rate was again in the product used in the demonstration, namely rye bread (57%), but all other examples were also accepted by half of the respondents(50-55%). Furthermore, when asked about willingness to pay more if the products contained an oxygen absorber, 40% of the respondents were willing to pay 0. 15e more 26.4.3 Acceptance of time-temperature indicators The concept of time-temperature indicators (TTls)has been well received in consumer studies(Anon, 1991, Korhonen et al, 1999, Sherlock and Labuza 1992). In a UK study(Anon, 1991) the majority of respondents(95%, n=511) considered TTIs as being a good idea because they show whether food is safe (28%), whether it is kept at the right temperature (21%)and whether food is fresh(16%). In an American questionnaire study(n=104)90% considered TTI tags as a desirable addition and 97% believed that they would increase confidence in the freshness of the product(Sherlock and Labuza, 1992). The study was carried out to find out how consumers react to the use of TTls in refrigerated dairy products. In a small interview study (n=21) carried out in Finland by Mikkola et al. (1997)a time-temperature indicator(TTI)created less uncertainty than an oxygen absorber. Increasing safety was perceived to be an obvious benefit because consumers do not have to trust merely their own senses The suspicion that these indicators may give inaccurate information and thereby cause a safety hazard was mentioned as a drawback together with adding price and waste(Anon, 1991; Mikkola et al, 1997). In three focus groups( Sherlock and Labuza, 1992)run in Nebraska, the Tti tags were considered to be clever devices that could be used to differentiate products on the market, but they were not perceived to replace date markers. Furthermore, the discussion brought to light a need for a consumer campaign before these tags could be used as a marketing tool, since consumers need to be informed about their benefits The TTIs were perceived to be most suitable for frozen food and freshly prepared refrigerated entrees, but not dairy products( Sherlock and Labuza 1992). In a Finnish study(Korhonen et al, 1999)TTls were regarded as necessary to most products but the most necessary targets were packaged fresh
Respondents’ attitudes towards oxygen absorbers were positive (3.8/max 5), respondents would rather favour than avoid them (3.6/max 5) and evaluated them more necessary than unnecessary (3.4/max 5) (Mikkola et al., 1997). Those who were most positive about oxygen absorbers were also positive about pre-packed food, use of additives and long shelf-life. When asked about the acceptance of oxygen absorbers in different types of meat products, use in pizza (62%), meatballs (48%), sausages (37%) were accepted best, while in fresh meat only 29% would accept them. The high acceptance rate in pizza illustrates the usefulness of the demonstration material in the study. Consumers could experience with their own senses what the benefits in pizza were and thus the acceptance rate is high. The low acceptance rate in fresh meat indicates that an idea of prolonged shelf-life is not considered as acceptable in fresh products. In bakery products the highest acceptance rate was again in the product used in the demonstration, namely rye bread (57%), but all other examples were also accepted by half of the respondents (50ÿ55%). Furthermore, when asked about willingness to pay more if the products contained an oxygen absorber, 40% of the respondents were willing to pay 0.15=Cmore. 26.4.3 Acceptance of time-temperature indicators The concept of time-temperature indicators (TTIs) has been well received in consumer studies (Anon., 1991; Korhonen et al., 1999; Sherlock and Labuza, 1992). In a UK study (Anon., 1991) the majority of respondents (95%; n 511) considered TTIs as being a good idea because they show whether food is safe (28%), whether it is kept at the right temperature (21%) and whether food is fresh (16%). In an American questionnaire study (n 104) 90% considered TTI tags as a desirable addition and 97% believed that they would increase confidence in the freshness of the product (Sherlock and Labuza, 1992). The study was carried out to find out how consumers react to the use of TTIs in refrigerated dairy products. In a small interview study (n 21) carried out in Finland by Mikkola et al. (1997) a time-temperature indicator (TTI) created less uncertainty than an oxygen absorber. Increasing safety was perceived to be an obvious benefit because consumers do not have to trust merely their own senses. The suspicion that these indicators may give inaccurate information and thereby cause a safety hazard was mentioned as a drawback together with adding price and waste (Anon., 1991; Mikkola et al., 1997). In three focus groups (Sherlock and Labuza, 1992) run in Nebraska, the TTI tags were considered to be clever devices that could be used to differentiate products on the market, but they were not perceived to replace date markers. Furthermore, the discussion brought to light a need for a consumer campaign before these tags could be used as a marketing tool, since consumers need to be informed about their benefits. The TTIs were perceived to be most suitable for frozen food and freshly prepared refrigerated entre´es, but not dairy products (Sherlock and Labuza, 1992). In a Finnish study (Korhonen et al., 1999) TTIs were regarded as necessary to most products but the most necessary targets were packaged fresh Testing consumer responses to new packaging concepts 557
558 Novel food packaging meat or fish, smoked fish, meat products, foods for children or ready prepared foods. Over 80% regarded TTIs as necessary in these applications although they were told that TTIs would increase the price of the product by 8.5 cents. This study was carried out as a survey in which participants (n=460)were asked to in a questionnaire. While responding to the questionnaire consumers could observe models of TTls used in packages. Similarly, 59% of the respondents in the Uk expressed their willingness to pay more for chilled products that contained a TTI tag(Anon, 1991) The result that TTIs are more suitable for fresh meat(Korhonen et al., 1999) whereas oxygen absorbers were considered acceptable in fresh meat by only by a minority of respondents(Mikkola et al, 1997) elevates the importance of perceived consumer benefit and understanding the reasons for food choices. The apparently contradictory result may be easily explained by the different functional principles of these two packaging devices, which may have a different appeal to consumers. The oxygen absorber could prolong the shelf-life of fresh meat, whereas the time temperature indicator shows only how it has been operated through the chill chain. The idea of extending the shelf-life of fresh meat is not attractive, but it is important to know if the fresh product is still in prime condition. This highlights the fact that all these different applications have to be studied as separate concepts in consumer studies. Measuring an overall attitude towards active and intelligent packaging is not feasible, as the benefits and possible concerns are specific to each application Some worries about possible tampering with TTls in the shop were brought forward(Anon, 1991, Korhonen et al, 1999). One worry was that the shopkeeper could possibly change the indicator and thus mislead consumers. In the UK(Anon, 1991) the non-cautious respondents perceived the TTls to the unnecessary and some reported that they would deliberately sabotage them if they appeared on the market. The technical reliability of the indicators was also questioned; other markings should be clear so that consumers would not have to trust solely the indicator In general, people seemed to trust the TTI indicators. When respondents had to make assessments on the quality of a food product they seemed to place more trust on the tti tag than on the date mark(Anon, 1991; Sherlock and labuza 1992). A vast majority in a study carried out in the UK (Anon, 1991) said that they would not buy a product even though the product was not past the best before mark, if the indicator had changed. If the situation was the other way around and after the best before date but the indicator showed that the product was good, about half of the respondents thought it was safe to eat. Over half of the respondents would use their own judgement to decide whether the food was edible, a third would adjust the temperature in the fridge and one in five would throw the food away. In an American study(Sherlock and Labuza, 1992)80% would not purchase a product if the date stamp indicated freshness but the TTI ag had changed. If the situation was the other way around 49% said that they would not be likely to buy the product. Although respondents seemed to trust the indicators more, having both date marks and indicators were perceived to be the
meat or fish, smoked fish, meat products, foods for children or ready prepared foods. Over 80% regarded TTIs as necessary in these applications although they were told that TTIs would increase the price of the product by 8.5 cents. This study was carried out as a survey in which participants (n 460) were asked to fill in a questionnaire. While responding to the questionnaire consumers could observe models of TTIs used in packages. Similarly, 59% of the respondents in the UK expressed their willingness to pay more for chilled products that contained a TTI tag (Anon., 1991). The result that TTIs are more suitable for fresh meat (Korhonen et al., 1999), whereas oxygen absorbers were considered acceptable in fresh meat by only by a minority of respondents (Mikkola et al., 1997) elevates the importance of perceived consumer benefit and understanding the reasons for food choices. The apparently contradictory result may be easily explained by the different functional principles of these two packaging devices, which may have a different appeal to consumers. The oxygen absorber could prolong the shelf-life of fresh meat, whereas the time temperature indicator shows only how it has been operated through the chill chain. The idea of extending the shelf-life of fresh meat is not attractive, but it is important to know if the fresh product is still in prime condition. This highlights the fact that all these different applications have to be studied as separate concepts in consumer studies. Measuring an overall attitude towards active and intelligent packaging is not feasible, as the benefits and possible concerns are specific to each application. Some worries about possible tampering with TTIs in the shop were brought forward (Anon., 1991; Korhonen et al., 1999). One worry was that the shopkeeper could possibly change the indicator and thus mislead consumers. In the UK (Anon., 1991) the non-cautious respondents perceived the TTIs to the unnecessary and some reported that they would deliberately sabotage them if they appeared on the market. The technical reliability of the indicators was also questioned; other markings should be clear so that consumers would not have to trust solely the indicator. In general, people seemed to trust the TTI indicators. When respondents had to make assessments on the quality of a food product they seemed to place more trust on the TTI tag than on the date mark (Anon., 1991; Sherlock and Labuza, 1992). A vast majority in a study carried out in the UK (Anon., 1991) said that they would not buy a product even though the product was not past the best before mark, if the indicator had changed. If the situation was the other way around and after the best before date but the indicator showed that the product was good, about half of the respondents thought it was safe to eat. Over half of the respondents would use their own judgement to decide whether the food was edible, a third would adjust the temperature in the fridge and one in five would throw the food away. In an American study (Sherlock and Labuza, 1992) 80% would not purchase a product if the date stamp indicated freshness but the TTI tag had changed. If the situation was the other way around 49% said that they would not be likely to buy the product. Although respondents seemed to trust the indicators more, having both date marks and indicators were perceived to be the 558 Novel food packaging techniques
Testing consumer responses to new packaging concepts 559 best solution in these studies. In the uk 88% thought both should be on the package and only about 11% would have been happy with either date mark or TTI(Anon, 1991). In the USA 75% thought that both should be attached to the package, but acceptance for the date mark (23%)and TtI tag(24%)were equal (Sherlock and Labuza, 1992). This may be due partly to the way the question was asked In the UK the study respondents had to make choices between the alternatives, whereas in the American study the questions were asked on separate rating scales. Therefore the same people could support the self- sufficiency both of date stamps and TTls. Having TTls in the package increased respondents willingness to buy the product by 72%(Sherlock and Labuza, 1992). The date marks and TTIs were regarded as tools that can complement each other and thus give a better guarantee of product quality(Anon, 1991 Sherlock and Labuza, 1992) In the study carried out in the Uk(Anon, 1991)the time-temperature indicators were also regarded as tools to educate consumers on how to keep food at home. If the product is in prime condition when bought and then the indicator changes rapidly at home, this may tell the consumer that the product has been stored in too warm an environment. The indicator would clearly demonstrate to consumers the need for appropriate practices in handling foods that should be 26.5 Consumers and the future of active and intelligent k Active and intelligent packaging technology offers several benefits to consumers. the different absorbers and indicators can be used for various purposes. The basic purpose is to guarantee that the food products are safe and keep their quality better. The performance of distinct applications of active and intelligent packaging is based on several mechanisms: some measure time and temperature sum, others absorb certain compounds that promote spoilage, and others, excrete beneficial compounds(hurme et al., 2002). The technological possibilities are well ahead of commercial applications, which may be due to suspicion about consumer attitudes towards these new devices. Consumers tend to be sensitive about novelty in the food domain, as food ingested and incorporated in the body could be an unknown substance and a potential source of risk As with all innovations, innovators themselves and early adapters are the first to adopt them, then acceptance spreads to the majority of the population According to Eastlack et al.(1993 )adoption happens relatively rapidly for packaging solutions. This may be due to the high exposure consumers have to new packaging solutions during their weekly visits to supermarkets or grocery stores and the low risk of these products. Nevertheless, to gain success in the market the new packaging solutions need to provide consumers with benefits or solutions to their current problems
best solution in these studies. In the UK 88% thought both should be on the package and only about 11% would have been happy with either date mark or TTI (Anon., 1991). In the USA 75% thought that both should be attached to the package, but acceptance for the date mark (23%) and TTI tag (24%) were equal (Sherlock and Labuza, 1992). This may be due partly to the way the question was asked. In the UK the study respondents had to make choices between the alternatives, whereas in the American study the questions were asked on separate rating scales. Therefore the same people could support the selfsufficiency both of date stamps and TTIs. Having TTIs in the package increased respondents’ willingness to buy the product by 72% (Sherlock and Labuza, 1992). The date marks and TTIs were regarded as tools that can complement each other and thus give a better guarantee of product quality (Anon., 1991; Sherlock and Labuza, 1992). In the study carried out in the UK (Anon., 1991) the time-temperature indicators were also regarded as tools to educate consumers on how to keep food at home. If the product is in prime condition when bought and then the indicator changes rapidly at home, this may tell the consumer that the product has been stored in too warm an environment. The indicator would clearly demonstrate to consumers the need for appropriate practices in handling foods that should be kept refrigerated. 26.5 Consumers and the future of active and intelligent packaging Active and intelligent packaging technology offers several benefits to consumers. The different absorbers and indicators can be used for various purposes. The basic purpose is to guarantee that the food products are safe and keep their quality better. The performance of distinct applications of active and intelligent packaging is based on several mechanisms: some measure time and temperature sum, others absorb certain compounds that promote spoilage, and others, excrete beneficial compounds (Hurme et al., 2002). The technological possibilities are well ahead of commercial applications, which may be due to suspicion about consumer attitudes towards these new devices. Consumers tend to be sensitive about novelty in the food domain, as food ingested and incorporated in the body could be an unknown substance and a potential source of risk. As with all innovations, innovators themselves and early adapters are the first to adopt them, then acceptance spreads to the majority of the population. According to Eastlack et al. (1993) adoption happens relatively rapidly for new packaging solutions. This may be due to the high exposure consumers have to new packaging solutions during their weekly visits to supermarkets or grocery stores and the low risk of these products. Nevertheless, to gain success in the market the new packaging solutions need to provide consumers with benefits or solutions to their current problems. Testing consumer responses to new packaging concepts 559