A review of the current state of emotion research in product development

Meiselman, Herbert L.

doi:10.1016/j.foodres.2015.04.015

Cited by 146 publications

(81 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Current scholarly literature on ‘emotion questionnaires’ focuses on several topics, including the following: product specificity, questionnaire length, language [1], derivation of terms [5], the nationality of the observers, the frequency of consumption for certain products [6], the number of offered products, the order of questions [2], the temporal dynamic of sensorial and emotional effects [7], natural or laboratory settings [8] and the measurement period itself [9]. A current overview is given by Meiselman [10] and Köster [11]. …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Development and Application of a Test for Food-Induced Emotions

Geier¹,

Büssing

Kruse

et al. 2016

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study aimed to develop a test to measure food-induced emotions suitable for stable food and beverages. All of the experiments were conducted under the conditions of a consumer sensory evaluation according to German standard DIN 10974. Test development included descriptors’ derivation and factor analysis as well as a comparison between the new test (empathic food test, EFT) and a hedonic sensory test and an unspecific psychological test, known as a multidimensional mood questionnaire (MDMQ). Nineteen sensory experts derived twelve items using free-choice profiling. After an exploratory factor analyses, ten of the intended twelve items were integrated into two scales. To compare the new questionnaire (EFT) to the MDMQ and a hedonic test, panels of 59 (EFT), 64 (MDMQ) and 63 (hedonic sensory test) untrained individuals described their perceptions after consuming sensorially similar pairs of milk, water, bread and sugar. The benchmark of comparison was the power to discriminate between the food pairs. Test-retest replicability was demonstrated. All three tests presented slight differences in sample preference and effect size depending on the offered products. These findings underscore the need to test new methods with a wide range of products. Further research is needed to investigate the relationship between sensorial perception and emotional response.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Development and Application of a Test for Food-Induced Emotions

Geier¹,

Büssing

Kruse

et al. 2016

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…EsSense25, PrEmo tool, interviews). We selected these methods as they fitted our study designs (Meiselman, 2015), such as being suitable for home-use measurements (Edwards, Hartwell, & Giboreau, 2016). Besides, most questionnaires that we selected have been extensively documented in the literature , which enabled us to compare our results to earlier findings in other age groups.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This choice imposed a trade-off between control and external validity (Edwards, Hartwell & Giboreau, 151 2016;Meiselman, 2015). For example, in the studies where we measured food-evoked emotions we did not take into account the natural environment in which a food is usually consumed (i.e.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…During the past decade of sensory and consumer science, the number of studies focussing on food-evoked emotions has expanded tremendously (Meiselman, 2015). Despite this expansion, there is still no commonly agreed-upon definition of 'emotion' (Coppin & Sander, 2016), let alone of 'food-evoked emotion'.…”

Section: Mealtime-related Emotions and Food-evoked Emotionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…; Coppin & Sander, 2016). Ferrarini et al (2010) and Meiselman (2015) translated these characteristics to the food context as follows: "affective responses to a specific food referent that are rapid, intense, and short lasting".…”

Section: Mealtime-related Emotions and Food-evoked Emotionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations