Advertisement

Do consumers care about organic and conventional food prices? An eye tracking study

  • Manika RödigerEmail author
  • Ulrich Hamm
Article
  • 14 Downloads

Abstract

There is a knowledge gap regarding the visual information search for prices of organic food during shopping. This study aimed to give insights on this subject and thus measured the visual information search using mobile eye-tracking glasses in a laboratory test market with 148 consumers. Study participants had to decide for one among six unfamiliar brands in each of two product categories. Consumers were grouped according to their choices in the test market into consumers of conventional food, regular consumers of organic food and occasional consumers of organic food. These groups were investigated regarding their visual search for package and price information of organic compared to conventional products. The results showed that 97.2% of consumers of conventional and 97.0% of regular consumers of organic food noticed most prices of organic food. Further, approximately three-quarters of price tags were reexamined after a first look. There was no difference between regular organic, occasional organic and conventional consumers in the amount of visual attention allocated to prices of organic food; however, of the time that participants spent looking at organic alternatives, conventional consumers gazed significantly longer at prices of organic food than regular and occasional organic consumers. The fixation durations on packages of organic and prices and packages of conventional products were significant predictors of the choice of organic and conventional products. The results imply that the precondition for price comparisons and evaluations, i.e. noticing prices, is met for most products in all consumer groups. Regular and occasional organic consumers pay attention to prices of organic and conventional products despite their organic ‘predisposition’. Even though conventional consumers are more focused on prices, many of them chose a conventional product which was higher priced than an organic alternative. Hence, other motivations also play a determining role for their choices.

Keywords

Consumer behaviour Organic food Price Eye tracking Visual attention Purchase decision 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We thank Johann Steinhauser for the fruitful collaboration during the conduction of the study, the data preparation, and the discussions about data analysis. We also thank Dr. Adriano Profeta for statistical advice. We further thank Ekaterina Babina, Frauke Kersting, Nazli Novruzova, Philip Schierning, Jan Hendrik Umbacher, Lea Müller, Marie Stützl, René Schneider, and David Kühn for their support during data collection. We also thank Anne Christopherson for proofreading the manuscript.

References

  1. Aertsens J, Verbeke W, Mondelaers K, van Huylenbroeck G (2009) Personal determinants of organic food consumption: a review. Br Food J 111(10):1140–1167.  https://doi.org/10.1108/00070700910992961 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aschemann-Witzel J, Niebuhr Aagaard EM (2014) Elaborating on the attitude-behaviour gap regarding organic products: Young Danish consumers and in-store food choice. Int J Consum Stud 38(5):550–558.  https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.12115 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Aschemann-Witzel J, Zielke S (2017) Can’t buy me green?: a review of consumer perceptions of and behavior toward the price of organic food. J Consum Aff 51(1):211–251.  https://doi.org/10.1111/joca.12092 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bearden WO, Netemeyer RG, Haws KL (2011) Handbook of marketing scales: multi-item measures for marketing and consumer behavior research (3rd ed.). Sage, Los Angeles, London, New Delhi, Singapore, Washington DCGoogle Scholar
  5. Bezawada R, Pauwels K (2013) What is special about marketing organic products? How organic assortment, price, and promotions dive retailer performance. J Mark 77:31–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bialkova S, Grunert KG, Juhl HJ, Wasowicz-Kirylo G, Stysko-Kunkowska M, van Trijp HCM (2014) Attention mediates the effect of nutrition label information on consumers’ choice. Evidence from a choice experiment involving eye-tracking. Appetite 76:66–75.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2013.11.021 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Buder F, Feldmann C, Hamm U (2014) Why regular buyers of organic food still buy many conventional products. Br Food J 116(3):390–404.  https://doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-04-2012-0087 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bunte FHJ, van Galen MA, Kuiper WE, Tacken G (2010) Limits to growth in organic sales. De Economist 158(4):387–410.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10645-010-9152-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chandon P, Hutchinson JW, Bradlow ET, Young SH (2009) Does in-store marketing work?: effects of the number and position of shelf facings on brand attention and evaluation at the point of purchase. J Mark 73:1–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chinnici G, D’Amico M, Pecorino B (2002) A multivariate statistical analysis on the consumers of organic products. British Food J 104(3/4/5):187–199CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Clement J (2007) Visual influence on in-store buying decisions: an eye-track experiment on the visual influence of packaging design. J Mark Manag 23(9–10):917–928.  https://doi.org/10.1362/026725707X250395 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dickson PR, Sawyer AG (1990) The price knowledge and search of supermarket shoppers. J Mark 54(3):42–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Duchowski AT (2007) Eye tracking methodology: theory and practice, 2nd edn. Springer London, LondonGoogle Scholar
  14. Eberhardt T, Kenning P, Schneider H (2009) On the validity of price knowledge measurements via self-assessment scales. Two studies in retailing. J Target Meas Anal Mark 17(2):93–103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Field A (2013) Discovering Statistics using IBM SPSS Statistics (4th ed.). Sage, Los Angeles London New Delhi Singapore Washington DCGoogle Scholar
  16. Frostling-Henningsson M, Hedbom M, Wilandh L (2014) Intentions to buy “organic” not manifested in practice. Br Food J 116(5):872–887.  https://doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-11-2010-0190 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gere A, Danner L, de AN, Kovács S, Dürrschmid K, Sipos L (2016) Visual attention accompanying food decision process: an alternative approach to choose the best models. Food Qual Prefer 51:1–7.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2016.01.009 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Gidlöf K, Anikin A, Lingonblad M, Wallin A (2017) Looking is buying: how visual attention and choice are affected by consumer preferences and properties of the supermarket shelf. Appetite 116:29–38.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2017.04.020 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gottschalk I, Leistner T (2013) Consumer reactions to the availability of organic food in discount supermarkets. Int J Consum Stud 37(2):136–142.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1470-6431.2012.01101.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hamm U, Aschemann J, Riefer A (2007) Sind die hohen Preise für Öko-Lebensmittel wirklich das zentrale Problem für den Absatz? Berichte über Landwirtschaft 85(2):252–271Google Scholar
  21. Hessisches Statistisches Landesamt (2016) Statistische Berichte - Das verfügbare Einkommen der privaten Haushalte in Hesse 2008 bis 2014 nach kreisfreien Städten und Landkreisen. Kennziffer P I 4 –j/2000-2014 rev.Google Scholar
  22. Holmqvist K, Nyström M, Andersson R, Dewhurst R, Jarodzka H, van de Weijer J (2011) Eye tracking: a comprehensive guide to methods and measures. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  23. Hughner RS, McDonagh P, Prothero A, Shultz CJ, Stanton J (2007) Who are organic food consumers? A compilation and review of why people purchase organic food. J Consum Behav 6(2–3):94–110.  https://doi.org/10.1002/cb.210 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Janssen M (2018) Determinants of organic food purchases: evidence from household panel data. Food Qual Prefer 68:19–28.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2018.02.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Janssen M, Hamm U (2012) The mandatory EU logo for organic food: consumer perceptions. Br Food J 114(3):335–352.  https://doi.org/10.1108/00070701211213456 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kenning P, Hartleb V, Schneider H (2011) An empirical multi-method investigation of price knowledge in food retailing. Intl J Retail Distrib Mgt 39(5):363–382CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Krajbich I, Lu D, Camerer C, Rangel A (2012) The attentional drift-diffusion model extends to simple purchasing decisions. Front Psychol 3:1–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lee H-J, Yun Z-S (2015) Consumers’ perceptions of organic food attributes and cognitive and affective attitudes as determinants of their purchase intentions toward organic food. Food Qual Prefer 39:259–267.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2014.06.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Lourenço CJ, Gijsbrechts E, Paap R (2015) The impact of category prices on store price image formation: an empirical analysis. J Mar Res 52(2):200–216.  https://doi.org/10.1509/jmr.11.0536 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Michael Bauer Research GmbH. (2017). Kaufkraft 2017 in Deutschland: Kreise und kreisfreie Städte - wichtigste Variablen. Nürnberg. Retrieved from http://www.mb-research.de/_download/MBR-Kaufkraft-Kreise.pdf (accessed 30.10.2017)
  31. Moser AK (2016) Consumers’ purchasing decisions regarding environmentally friendly products: an empirical analysis of German consumers. J Retail Consum Serv 31:389–397.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2016.05.006 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Netemeyer RG, Krishnan B, Pullig C, Wang G, Yagci M, Dean D, Ricks J, Wirth F (2004) Developing and validating measures of facets of customer-based brand equity. Measurement Valid Marketing Res 57(2):209–224.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0148-2963(01)00303-4 Google Scholar
  33. Orquin JL, Mueller Loose S (2013) Attention and choice: a review on eye movements in decision making. Acta Psychol 144(1):190–206.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2013.06.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Padilla Bravo C, Cordts A, Schulze B, Spiller A (2013) Assessing determinants of organic food consumption using data from the German National Nutrition Survey II. Food Qual Prefer 28(1):60–70.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2012.08.010 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Pärnamets P, Johansson R, Gidlöf K, Wallin A (2016) How information availability interacts with visual attention during judgment and decision tasks. J Behav Decis Mak 29(2–3):218–231.  https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.1902 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Rayner K (1998) Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research. Psychol Bull 124(3):372–422CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Rödiger M, Plaßmann S, Hamm U (2016) Organic consumers’ price knowledge, willingness-to-pay and purchase decision. British Food J 118(11):2732–2743CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Simon H, Fassnacht M (2016) Preismanagement: Strategie—Analyse—Entscheidung—Umsetzung. Springer Gabler, WiesbadenGoogle Scholar
  39. Sprott DE, Manning KC, Miyazaki AD (2003) Grocery price setting and quantity surcharges. J Mark 67(3):34–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Stadt Kassel – Fachstelle Statistik (2017) Statistikatlas Kassel. Retrieved from: http://statistikatlas.kassel.de/bericht1/atlas.html (accessed 30.10.2017)
  41. Statistisches Bundesamt (Destatis) (2017) Staat and Gesellschaft: Bevölkerungsstand. Bevölkerung auf Grundlage des Zensus 2011. Retrieved from https://www.destatis.de/DE/ZahlenFakten/GesellschaftStaat/Bevoelkerung/Bevoelkerungsstand/Tabellen/Zensus_Geschlecht_Staatsangehoerigkeit.html (accessed 28.10.2017)
  42. Stolz H, Stolze M, Hamm U, Janssen M, Ruto E (2011) Consumer attitudes towards organic versus conventional food with specific quality attributes. NJAS – Wageningen J of Life Sci 58:67–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Zander K, Stolz H, Hamm U (2013) Promising ethical arguments for product differentiation in the organic food sector. A mixed methods research approach. Appetite 62:133–142.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2012.11.015 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Agricultural and Food MarketingUniversity of KasselKasselGermany

Personalised recommendations