The Effects of the Metacognitive Cue of Fluency on Evaluations about Taste Perception
- 1 Department of Marketing, International Business and Strategy, Goodman School of Business, Brock University, St. Catharines, Canada
- 2 Department of Marketing, International Business and Strategy, Goodman School of Business, Brock University, St. Catharines, Canada
- 3 Department of Marketing, International Business and Strategy, Goodman School of Business, Brock University, St. Catharines, Canada
- 4 Department of Psychology, Brock University, St. Catharines, Canada
Abstract
The metacognitive cue of fluency is known to affect consumers’ evaluations and judgments (Schwarz, 2004). We questioned whether this effect extends to perceived taste experiences, and whether knowledge moderates the effect of fluency on taste evaluations. Across 3 experiments we demonstrate that the meta cognitive cue of fluency is used by consumers in evaluating their taste experiences. Whereas disfluent cues are associated with lower taste evaluations for a utilitarian product (Experiment 1), disfluent cues are associated with higher taste evaluations for a hedonic product, especially for knowledgeable consumers (Experiment 2), when compared to a no-label (control) condition. Fluency cues that are intrinsic to the product (e.g., ingredients) however do not have the same effect on judgment about hedonic products (Ex periment 3). These findings are important for designing product labels.
- Alter, A. L., & Oppenheimer, D. M. (2008a). Easy on the mind, easy on the wallet: The role of familiarity and processing fluency in valuation judgments. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 15, 985-990. doi:10.3758/PBR.15.5.985
- Alter, A. L., & Oppenheimer, D. M. (2008b). Effects of fluency on psychological distance and mental construal (or why New York is a large city, but New York is a civilized jungle). Psychological Science, 19, 161-167. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02062.x
- Alter, A. L., & Oppenheimer, D. M. (2009). Uniting the tribes of fluency to form a metacognitive nation. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 13, 219-235. doi:10.1177/1088868309341564
- Ballester, J., Patris, B., Symoneaux, R., & Valentin, D. (2008). Conceptual vs. perceptual wine spaces: Does expertise matter. Food Quality and Preference, 19, 267-276. doi:10.1016/j.foodqual.2007.08.001
- Bruner, G. (2009). Marketing scales handbook. V5: A compilation of multi-item measures for consumer behavior and advertising research. Chicago, IL: American Marketing Association.
- Cardello, A. V., Maller, O., Kapsalis, J. G., Segars, R. A., Sawyer, F. M., Murphy, C., & Moskowitz, H. R. (1982). Perception of texture by trained and consumer panelists. Journal of Food Science, 47, 1186-1197. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2621.1982.tb07646.x
- Elder, R. S., & Krishna, A. (2010). The effects of advertising copy on sensory thoughts and perceived taste. Journal of Consumer Research, 36, 748-756. doi:10.1086/605327
- Hughson, A., & Boakes, R. (2001). Perceptual and cognitive aspects of wine expertise. Australian Journal of Psychology, 53, 103-108. doi:10.1080/00049530108255130
- Krishna, A. (2012). An integrative review of sensory marketing: Engaging the senses to affect perception, judgment and behavior. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 22, 332-351. doi:10.1016/j.jcps.2011.08.003
- Lawless, H. (1984). Flavour discrimination of white wine by “expert” and non-expert wine consumers. Journal of Food Science, 49, 120-123. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2621.1984.tb13686.x
- Leclerc, F., Schmitt, B. H., & Dube, L. (1994). Foreign branding and its effects on product perceptions and attitudes. Journal of Marketing Research, 31, 263-270. doi:10.2307/3152198
- Lee, L., Frederick, S., & Ariely, D. (2006). Try it, you’ll like it: The influence of expectation, consumption, and revelation on preferences for beer. Psychological Science, 17, 1054-1058. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01829.x