Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

How to Make Non-Natural Products Appear More Natural? Changes in Process Work Better Than Changes in Content

  • Conference paper
Marketing Dynamism & Sustainability: Things Change, Things Stay the Same…

Abstract

This article aims to study the factors that contribute to increasing the naturalness of non-natural products. An experimental survey investigates the influence of product process and content modifications. Our results support the process dominance hypothesis by showing that process modification increase more naturalness ratings than content modification. In addition, changes in process (but not changes in content) induce a positive halo that alters how other product attributes are assessed (e.g., health perceived risk, expected effectiveness). The relationship between process modification and naturalness judgments is mediated by the perceived transformation, origin and appearance of the product.

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 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
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

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Baumeister, R.F., Bratslavsky, E., Finkenauer, C, & Vohs, K.D. (2001). Bad is stronger than good. Review of General Psychology. 5, 323–370.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bredahl, L. (1999). Consumers’ cognitions with regard to genetically modified foods — results of a qualitative study in four countries. Appetite, 33, 343–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burton S., Garretson, J., & Velliquette, A.M. (1999). Implications of accurate usage of nutrition facts panel information for food product evaluations and purchase intentions. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science. 27(4), 470–480.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dangour, A.D., Dodhia, S.K., Hayter, A., Allen, E., Lock, K., & Uauy, R. (2009). Nutritional quality of organic foods: a systematic review. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 92(1), 203–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Darby, M.R,, & Kami, E. (1973). Free competition and the optimal amount of fraud. Journal of Law and Economics, 16, 67–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deliza, R., Rosenthal, A., Abadio, F.B.D., Carlos, H.O., & Castillo, C. (2005). Application of high pressure technology in the fruit juice processing: benefits perceived by consumers. Journal of Food Engineering, 67, 241–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Descola, P. (2005). Par-delà nature et culture. Paris: Gallimard.

    Google Scholar 

  • Federal Drug Association (2007). Product and ingredient safety: Parabens. Available at http://www.fda.gov/cosmetics/productandingredientsafety/selectcdcosmcticingrcdients/ucm128042.htm

  • Fromm, E. (1964). The heart of man. New York: Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grolleau, G., & Caswell, J. A. (2006). Interaction between food attributes in markets: The case of environmental labeling. Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, 31(3), 471–484.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoegg, J., Alba, J., & Dahl, D. (2010), The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly: Aesthetic influence on information processing. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 20(4), 419–430.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hughner, R., McDonagh, P., Prothero, R., Shultz II, C.J., & Stanton, J. (2007). Who are organic food consumers?: A compilation and review of why people purchase organic food. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 6, 94–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahn, P. H. (1999). The Human Relationship with Nature: Development and Culture. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kline Group (2010). Natural personal care 2010: Global market analysis and competitive brand assessment.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kozup, J.C., Creyer, E.H., & Burton, S. (2003). Making healthful food choices: The influence health claims and nutrition information on consumers’ evaluations of packaged food products and restaurant menu items. Journal of Marketing, 67(2), 19–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lévi-Strauss, C. (2003). Anthropologie structurale. Paris: Pocket.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liberman, N., Trope, Y., & Waslak, C. (2007). Construal level and consumer behavior. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 77(2),113–117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Magnusson, M., Arvola, A., Hursti, U., Aberg, L., & Sjoden, P. (2001). Attitudes towards organic foods among Swedish consumers. British Food Journal, 103(3), 209–226.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mailer, C, Townsend, M., & Brown, P. (2002). Healthy parks healthy people: the health benefits of contact with nature in a park context: a review of current literature. Victoria: Deakin University and Parks.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moorman, C. (1990). The effects of stimulus and consumer characteristics on the utilization of nutrition information. Journal of Consumer Research, 17(3), 362–374.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nisbett R. E., & Wilson T. D. (1977). The halo effect: Evidence for unconscious alteration of judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35(4), 250–256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olson, J. C, & Jacoby, J. (1972). Cue utilization in the quality perception process. In M. Venkatesan (Ed.), Proceedings of the 3rdannual conference of the Association for Consumer Research (pp. 167–179), Iowa City: Association for Consumer Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ott, S.L. (1990). Supermarket shoppers pesticide concerns and willingness to purchase. Agribusiness, 6, 593–602.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2004). SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 36, 717–731.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rozin, P. (2005). The meaning of natural. Psychological Science, 16(8), 652–658.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rozin, P. (2006). Naturalness judgments by lay Americans: Process dominates content in judgments of food or water acceptability and naturalness. Judgment and Decision Making, 1(2), 91–97.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rozin, P. (2008). La préférence pour le naturel. In Fischler C, & Masson (Eds.), Manger: Français, Européens et Américains face à l’alimentation (pp. 193–208). Paris: Odile Jacob.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rozin P., Nemeroff, C, Wane, M., & Sherrod, A. (1989). Operation of the sympathetic magical law of contagion in interpersonal attitudes among Americans. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 27, 367–370.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rozin, P., & Nemeroff, CJ. (1990). The laws of sympathetic magic: A psychological analysis of similarity and contagion. In J. Stigler, G. Herdt & R.A. Shweder (Eds.), Cultural Psychology: Essays on comparative human development (pp. 205– 232). Cambridge, England: Cambridge.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Rozin, P., Ashmore, M., & Markwith M. (1996), Lay American conceptions of nutrition: Dose insensitivity, categorical thinking, contagion, and the monotonie mind. Health Psychology, 16, 438–447.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rozin, P., & Rozyman, E.B. (2001). Negativity bias, negativity dominance, and contagion. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 5, 296–320.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rozin, P., Spranca, M., Krieger, Z., Neuhaus R., Surillo D., Swerdlin A., & Wood K. (2004). Natural preference: instrumental and ideational/moral motivations, and the contrast between foods and medicines. Appetite, 43, 147–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rozin, P., Fischler, C, & Shields-Argelès, C. (2009). Additivity dominance: Additivites are more potent and more often lexicalized across languages than are “subtractives”. Judgment and Decision Making, 4(6), 475–478.

    Google Scholar 

  • Russo, J.E., Staelin, R. Nolan, C.A, Russell, G.J., & Metcalf, B.L. (1986). Nutrition information in the super-market. Journal of Consumer Research, 13(1),48–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schifferstein, H. N. J., & Oude Ophuis, P. A. M. (1998). Health-related determinants of organic food consumption in the Netherlands. Food Quality and Preference, 9(3), 119–133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schuldt, J.P., & Schwarz, N. (2010). The “organic” path to obesity? Organic claims influence calorie judgments and exercise recommendations. Judgment and Decision Making, 5, 144–150.

    Google Scholar 

  • St Leger, L. (2003). Health and nature-new challenges for health promotion?. Health Promotion International, 18(3), 173– 175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Soffritti, M., Belpoggi, F., Esposti, D.D., Lambertini, L., Tibaldi, E., & Rigano, A. (2006). First experimental demonstration of the multipotential carcinogenic effects of aspartame administered in the Feed to Sprague-Dawley Rats. Environmental Health Perspectives, 114, 379–385.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steel, B. S. (1996). Thinking globally and acting locally? Environmental attitudes, behavior, and activism. Journal of Environmental Management, 47, 27–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tenbült P., De Vries, N.K., Dreezens, E., & Martijn, C. (2005). Perceived naturalness and acceptance of genetically modified food. Appetite, 45, 47–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, S.C.G, & Barton, M. (1994). Ecocentric and anthropocentric attitudes toward the environment. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 14, 149–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thorndike, E. L. (1920). A constant error on psychological ratings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 4, 25–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tregear, A., Dent, J.B., & McGregor, M.J. (1994). The demand for organically grown produce. British Food Journal, 96, 21–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, E. O. (1984). Biophilia. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Zhao, X., Lynch, J. G., & Chen, Q. (2010). Reconsidering Baron and Kenny: Myths and truths about mediation analysis. Journal of Consumer Research. 37(2), 197–206,

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Houston, USA

    Pierrick Gomez

Authors
  1. Pierrick Gomez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of Houston-Clear Lake, Houston, TX, USA

    Leroy Robinson Jr.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Academy of Marketing Science

About this paper

Cite this paper

Gomez, P. (2015). How to Make Non-Natural Products Appear More Natural? Changes in Process Work Better Than Changes in Content. In: Robinson, L. (eds) Marketing Dynamism & Sustainability: Things Change, Things Stay the Same…. Developments in Marketing Science: Proceedings of the Academy of Marketing Science. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-10912-1_204

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation