Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-cx56b Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-09-21T16:36:39.009Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Product Information, Hedonic Evaluation, and Purchase Decision: an Experimental Study of Orange Juice*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 June 2012

Pierre Combris ,
Christine Lange  and
Sylvie Issanchou
Pierre Combris
Affiliation:
INRA, Laboratoire de Recherche sur la Consommation (CORELA), 65, Bd de Brandebourg, F 94205 Ivry-sur-Seine Cedex, E-mail:combris@ivry.inra.fr
Christine Lange
Affiliation:
CNRS, Centre Européen des Sciences du Goût (CESG), Dijon,France. E-mail: lange@cesg.cnrs.fr
Sylvie Issanchou
Affiliation:
INRA, Unité Mixte de Recherche Flaveur, Vision, Comportement du Consommateur (FLAVIC), Dijon,France. E-mail: Sylvie.Issanchou@dijon.inra.fr
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Two randomly sampled groups of subjects were endowed with real budgets and placed in 5 different budget/price situations. In each situation they had to evaluate 6 orange juices and complete a demand table. At the end of the experiment, one demand table was randomly selected and participants had to buy the corresponding products. In one group, participants choose after looking at the packaging in the other they could also taste the products. Results show that participants who chose without tasting, made quicker decisions, selected a larger number of variants and were more influenced by prices than those who could taste the products. Although choices appeared very heterogeneous, most participants exhibit coherent behaviors. (JEL classification: C91, D12)

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Wine Economics , Volume 2 , Issue 1 , Spring 2007 , pp. 40 - 54
Copyright
Copyright © American Association of Wine Economists 2007

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Février, Ph. and Visser, M. (2004). A study of consumer behavior using laboratory data. Experimental Economics, 7 (1), 93–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
INSEE (1998), Annuaire Statistique de la France. Paris: INSEE Editions.Google Scholar
Lange, Ch., Issanchou, S. and Combris, P. (2000). Expected versus experienced quality: trade-off with price. Food Quality and Preference, 11, 289–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
List, J. and Gallet, C. (2001). What experimental protocol influence disparities between actual and hypothetical stated values? Evidence from a meta-analysis. Environmental and Resource Economics, 20, 241–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lusk, J. and Schroeder, T. (2004). Are choice experiments incentive compatible? A test with quality differentiated beef steaks. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 86 (2), 467–482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacFie, H.J., Bratchell, N., Greenhoff, K. and Vallis, L.V. (1989). Designs to balance the effect of order of presentation and first-order carry-over effects in Hall tests. Journal of Sensory Studies, 4, 129–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar