Importance of intrinsic and extrinsic quality food characteristics by different consumer segments

Abstract

Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to examine intrinsic and extrinsic food quality characteristics and the relative importance placed on these characteristics by different consumer segments. Moreover, relationship between segments of consumers and consumption frequency of differentiated food products (traditional, functional and organic) was analysed.

Design/methodology/approach
A three-stage stratified random sampling approach was employed and data were collected via 500 face-to-face interviews conducted in respondents’ homes. A version of the Food Choice Questionnaire was used to examine the motives of consumers’ underlying food choices. The collected data were analysed by factor analysis followed by cluster analysis.

Findings
Four factors were identified: health and sensory characteristics, price and availability, body weight and digestion, and convenience. Resulting clusters were named as: healthy and tasty food lovers, convenient, concerned, and indifferent consumers. Differences were identified between the segments according to consumers’ frequency of consumption of the different types of food products.

Practical implications
The findings have impact implications for food producers and distributors in developing communication strategies for consumer segments with different attitudes and motives. The findings of this study not only contribute to the organic, traditional, and food with health claim literature, but also help industry, government, and consumer associations fully understand consumer perceptions of intrinsic and extrinsic foods characteristics and enhance consumers’ responses to the different types of food products.

Originality/value
The study represents one of the first assessments of the importance of food quality characteristics, segmentation, and consumption frequency of traditional, organic, and functional food products in Central and Eastern Europe.

Full text

British Food Journal
Importance of intrinsic and extrinsic quality food characteristics by different
consumer segments
Ruzica Brečić, Željka Mesić, Marija Cerjak,
Article information:
To cite this document:
Ruzica Brečić, Željka Mesić, Marija Cerjak, (2017) "Importance of intrinsic and extrinsic quality food
characteristics by different consumer segments", British Food Journal, Vol. 119 Issue: 4,pp. 845-862,
doi: 10.1108/BFJ-06-2016-0284
Permanent link to this document:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-06-2016-0284
Downloaded on: 30 March 2017, At: 00:21 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 81 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 37 times since 2017*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
(2005),"Exploring the gap between attitudes and behaviour: Understanding why consumers
buy or do not buy organic food", British Food Journal, Vol. 107 Iss 8 pp. 606-625 http://
dx.doi.org/10.1108/00070700510611002
(2012),"The influence of the quality of the physical environment, food, and service on
restaurant image, customer perceived value, customer satisfaction, and behavioral intentions",
International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 24 Iss 2 pp. 200-223 http://
dx.doi.org/10.1108/09596111211206141
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-
srm:327689 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald
for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission
guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company
manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as
well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and
services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the
Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for
digital archive preservation.
*Related content and download information correct at time of download.
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF ZAGREB At 00:21 30 March 2017 (PT)

Importance of intrinsic and
extrinsic quality food
characteristics by different
consumer segments
Ruzica Brečić
Department of Marketing, University of Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia, and
Željka Mesićand Marija Cerjak
Department of Agriculture Marketing, University of Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia
Abstract
Purpose –The purpose of this paper is to examine intrinsic and extrinsic food quality characteristics and the
relative importance placed on these characteristics by different consumer segments. Moreover, relationship
between segments of consumers and consumption frequency of differentiated food products (traditional,
functional and organic) was analysed.
Design/methodology/approach –A three-stage stratified random sampling approach was employed and
data were collected via 500 face-to-face interviews conducted in respondents’homes. A version of the
Food Choice Questionnaire was used to examine the motives of consumers’underlying food choices.
The collected data were analysed by factor analysis followed by cluster analysis.
Findings –Four factors were identified: health and sensory characteristics, price and availability, body
weight and digestion, and convenience. Resulting clusters were named as: healthy and tasty food lovers,
convenient, concerned, and indifferent consumers. Differences were identified between the segments
according to consumers’frequency of consumption of the different types of food products.
Practical implications –The findings have impact implications for food producers and distributors in
developing communication strategies for consumer segments with different attitudes and motives.
The findings of this study not only contribute to the organic, traditional, and food with health claim literature,
but also help industry, government, and consumer associations fully understand consumer perceptions of
intrinsic and extrinsic foods characteristics and enhance consumers’responses to the different types
of food products.
Originality/value –The study represents one of the first assessments of the importance of food quality
characteristics, segmentation, and consumption frequency of traditional, organic, and functional food
products in Central and Eastern Europe.
Keywords Segmentation, Consumer motives, Extrinsic, Food quality characteristic, Intrinsic
Paper type Research paper
Introduction and background
Consumers’personal food choices are changing due to a greater variety of food products,
higher incomes, and better choices of food retailers (Żakowska Biemans, 2011). The term
food choice refers to “a set of conscious and unconscious decisions made by a person at the
point of purchase, at the point of consumption, or any point in between”(Herne, 1995).
Food choice is a complex function of sensory characteristics (taste, odour, texture) combined
with the influence of non-sensory factors, including food-related expectations and attitudes
(Shepherd, 1999), health claims (Vickers, 1993; Prescott et al., 2002), price (Vickers, 1993;
Markovina et al., 2015), ethical concerns (Markovina et al., 2015), and mood (Pula et al., 2014).
It has long been recognized that at individual level, taste or sensory appeal, likes and
dislikes, and sheer habit are all relevant for making a food choice (Markovina et al., 2015).
British Food Journal
Vol. 119 No. 4, 2017
pp. 845-862
© Emerald Publishing Limited
0007-070X
DOI 10.1108/BFJ-06-2016-0284
Received 28 June 2016
Revised 17 November 2016
Accepted 19 November 2016
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/0007-070X.htm
This paper is based on research done in the frame of the FOCUS-BALKANS Project (Grant
Agreement No. 212579), a three-years FP7 European Research programme, and will present some of
the relevant data.
845
Intrinsic and
extrinsic
quality food
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF ZAGREB At 00:21 30 March 2017 (PT)

During the past 20 years, there are a large number of researchers who have been trying
to understand consumers and their motives underlying the selection of food. An instrument
(Food Choice Questionnaire (FCQ)) that could predict general food choice was originally
developed and tested in the UK by Steptoe et al. (1995), where it has been used extensively to
assess food choice motives. Since then, there has been an increase in research that has
attempted to understand similarities and differences in motives for food choice (Honkanen
and Frewer, 2009; Fotopoulos et al., 2009; Januszewska et al., 2011; Pieniak et al., 2013;
Markovina et al., 2015; Espinoza-Ortega et al., 2016). Some studies have used the FCQ to
explore the motivation for functional food (Žeželj et al., 2012; Brečićet al., 2014), the
motivation behind organic food (Lockie et al., 2002), healthy eating (Sun, 2008; Žeželj et al.,
2012), and ethical food choice reasons (Lindeman and Vaananen, 2000; Eertmans et al., 2006).
Recent years have seen a growing interest in the quality issue both among consumers
and producers. Food quality is a multifaceted and a very subjective concept, and all food
choice motives rated by consumers are somehow related to food quality (Ozimek and
Żakowska-Biemans, 2011). Consumers’quality judgements of food depend on perceptions,
needs, and the goals they have (Steenkamp, 1990). Quality is a multidimensional construct
that is perceived based on both perceived intrinsic and extrinsic quality cues available
(Acebrón and Dopico, 2000). The concept of quality is essentially defined by the consumer;
therefore, it is not easy to measure (Grunert et al., 1996). For the consumer to be able to
evaluate quality, he or she needs to have information on the quality characteristics of the
product. The pieces of information, usually called qualitative cues, are informational stimuli
that, according to the consumer, say something about the product; i.e. they are used to
evaluate the performance of the product with respect to the consumer demands (Steenkamp,
1990, 1997; Grunert, 2002). It is common to distinguish between intrinsic and extrinsic
quality cues (Olson and Jacoby, 1972; Olson, 1977).
Intrinsic attributes permit objective measurement of quality. These qualities imbue the
product with its functionality and relate to its physical aspect. According to Olson and
Jacoby (1972), intrinsic attributes are specific to each product, disappear when it is
consumed, and cannot be altered without changing the nature of the product itself.
Extrinsic attributes are aspects that are related to the product but are not physically a
part of it. They differ from the product itself but are strongly associated with it and should
be considered in any evaluation of its characteristics. Extrinsic indicators mostly refer to
price, brand name, store name (Rao and Monroe, 1989), or to more general cues, such as the
country of origin (Erickson et al., 1984).
Considerable research in consumer behaviour has been devoted to examining what
extrinsic and intrinsic information cue(s) consumers use most often when selecting food
(Steenkamp, 1997; Espejel et al., 2007) or after the purchase decision (Enneking et al., 2007).
The study of Fandos and Flavian (2006) on traditional food products revealed a positive
relationship between extrinsic attributes and loyalty expressed by consumers. They also
showed that intrinsic attributes of the product had a positive influence on buying intentions.
Enneking et al. (2007) evaluated the importance of intrinsic and extrinsic product attributes
on purchase decisions. Consumers utilize intrinsic and extrinsic cues in determining the
quality of a product (Lee and Lou, 2011). Product familiarity, enduring involvement, and
price-reliance schema have a significant influence on consumers’utilization of extrinsic cues
(Lee and Lou, 2011). The importance of intrinsic and extrinsic variables is very
well recognized (Enneking et al., 2007; Lee and Lou, 2011), as well as the importance of just
extrinsic characteristics (Iop et al., 2006; Mueller and Szolnoki, 2010).
However, the importance of intrinsic and extrinsic quality characteristics of food and the
relative importance placed on these factors by different segments of consumers have not yet
been analysed. Therefore, our research questions are:
RQ1. What intrinsic and extrinsic attributes are important for consumers?
846
BFJ
119,4
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF ZAGREB At 00:21 30 March 2017 (PT)

RQ2. What factors could explain those differences among consumers?
RQ3. How can we segment consumers based on the importance of intrinsic and extrinsic
food attributes?
To the best of our knowledge, the relationship between such consumer segments and the
consumption frequency of food products has not yet been the focus of research. It is
important for practitioners and researchers to understand the interplay of sensory and
non-sensory attributes as both dimensions must be optimized for a product to be successful
in the marketplace. This is especially true for differentiated food products. In general,
products are differentiated in two dimensions, one being the dimension of varietal
(or horizontal) differentiation and the other being a dimension of quality (or vertical)
differentiation (Ahmadov, 2008). Differentiated food products are important due to the
increased national and international competition among companies in the food industry
(Loizou et al., 2013). The three differentiated food product categories that are examined in
this study are traditional, functional, and organic. The definitions of the three differentiated
food product categories, along with a comprehensive analysis of consumers’preferences for
these categories are explained below.
According to Trichopoulou et al. (2007), traditional food is “a food of a specific feature or
features, which distinguish it clearly from other similar products of the same category in
terms of the use of “traditional ingredients”(raw materials or primary products) or
“traditional composition”,or“traditional type of production and/or processing method”.
A“consumer-driven”definition of traditional food is: “[…] a product frequently consumed
or associated with specific celebrations and/or seasons, normally transmitted from one
generation to another, made with care in a specific way according to the gastronomic
heritage, with little or no processing/manipulation, that is distinguished and known because
of its sensory properties and associated to a certain local area, region or country”
(Guerrero et al., 2009). As far as consumer preferences for traditional food are concerned, it
has been found that “nowadays, consumers are increasingly looking for traditional food
products”(Amuquandoh and Asafo-Adjei, 2013; Renko and Bucar, 2014; Hidalgo-Milpa
et al., 2016). At the same time, such products are perceived by consumers as “high quality
products with positive health aspects and positive image”(Cerjak et al., 2014; Renko and
Bucar, 2014). However, Guerrero et al. (2009) have found that such products are also subject
to cultural preferences, and that “consumers from different countries and cultures had, to
some extent, different image of traditional foods”. More recent research shows that, in
transition economies, the choice of traditional foods is regarded as a psychological tool,
helping consumers to “cope with modernisation trends in such transition economies”
(Estève et al., 2011).
As far as functional food is concerned, the most widely accepted definition was provided
by Diplock et al. (1999), claiming that “a food can be regarded as functional if it is
satisfactorily demonstrated to affect beneficially one or more target functions in the body”.
Nowadays, due to multinational companies engaged in the functional food business shifting
their business to emerging markets, this market has grown and academic researchers are
trying to understand consumers’perceptions (Ozen et al., 2014; Cerjak and Tomic, 2015;
Moro et al., 2015, Schnettler and Grunert, 2016). However, there are still not enough
comprehensive determinants of consumption of functional foods (Carrillo et al., 2011). In the
majority of previous studies, attitudes and purchase intentions were considered, as well as
specific functional foods, rather than their actual consumption. There is, therefore, “a lack of
studies which consider the extent to which individuals consume a variety of functional
foods”(Cranfield et al., 2011, p. 377). So far, research has been based mainly on the analysis
of data for North America and Western Europe, so there’s a need to analyse demand in
rapidly growing emerging economies, recognizing “that attitudes to such products can be
847
Intrinsic and
extrinsic
quality food
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF ZAGREB At 00:21 30 March 2017 (PT)

culture-specific”(Henson et al., 2008, p. 396). Functional food sales started to increase
remarkably over the last five years. In particular, functional milk and yogurt categories
present intensively upward trends (Euromonitor, 2016). Researcher interest in functional
foods has been growing steadily in recent years (Ozen et al., 2014; Brečićet al., 2014;
GajdošKljusuric et al., 2015; Schnettler and Grunert, 2016), but according to Ozen et al. (2014),
there still exist huge differences between Europeans on the consumption of functional foods.
Organic food was described as “food guaranteed to have been produced, stored, and
processed without adding synthetic fertilizers and chemicals”(Lockie et al., 2002). Numerous
studies have paid attention to the way in which consumers perceive organic products
(Cerjak et al., 2010; Asioli et al., 2014; Hemmerling et al., 2016). They are mainly perceived as
healthier, safer, more environmentally friendly, and tastier than conventional foods. The two
major factors for organic food preference were shown to be a lower perceived level of
contamination and a higher nutrient content of organic vegetables (Hoefkens et al., 2011).
It is no wonder then that from 1999 to 2011, the global market for organic products has
increased by 235 per cent, and that the most rapid growth has been observed in Europe and
North America while the countries of Central and Eastern Europe, such as Croatia, follow the
global trend of converting from conventional to organic agriculture (Renko et al., 2011).
However, despite these figures and positive consumer perceptions, “the market share of
organic products remains low, varying from less than 1 per cent in some Southern, Central and
Eastern European countries to more than 7.6 per cent in Denmark, Switzerland (7.1 per cent),
Austria (6.5 per cent in 2011), and Germany (4.4 per cent) (FiBL & IFOAM –Organics
International, 2016, p. 66). Specifically, retail sales of organic products totalled approximately
26.2 billion euros in 2014 (European Union: 23.9 billion euros), an increase of 7.6 per cent over
2013. Market growth was noted in all countries for which 2014 data were available, and in
some cases, it was in the double digits (FiBL & IFOAM –Organics International, 2016, p. 66).
For that reason, the fourth research question of this study is:
RQ4. What is the relationship between identified segments of consumers and
consumption frequency of differentiated food products (traditional, organic, and
functional).
Methods
Questionnaire and measurement scale
To examine the motives of consumers’underlying food choices, a version of the FCQ with a
five-point scale was used. The original scale contains 36 items and measures higher number
of dimensions (health, mood, convenience, sensory appeal, natural content, price, weight
control, familiarity, and ethical concern), each presented with three to five indicators
(Steptoe et al., 1995). But the factor solutions of Chryssochoidis et al. (2007) and Eertmans
et al. (2006) appeared to differ from the configuration obtained by Steptoe et al. (1995). Some
divergences were rather small whereas other incongruities were large enough to reinterpret
factors. Overall, the results of the tests conducted by Eertmans et al. (2006) do not support
Steptoe et al.’s (1995) assumption that the FCQ has a factorial structure that would
generalize from the original UK samples across western urban populations (i.e. a factorial
structure that would show at least configural invariance, Steenkamp and Baumgartner,
1998). Instead, the work by Eertmans et al. (2006) suggests that the FCQ-items and the
underlying constructs may have different connotations in other western cultures, whether it
concerns English speaking or non-English speaking countries. Moreover, recent research
with a sample of Greek consumers (Krystallis et al., 2007) also failed to confirm the initial
FCQ factorial design. Nevertheless, this deviation from the original does not alter the quite
satisfactory reliability of the instrument for the Greek sample (Chryssochoidis et al., 2007).
Results at the subpopulation level indicate that some of the basic concepts of the original
848
BFJ
119,4
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF ZAGREB At 00:21 30 March 2017 (PT)

FCQ (i.e. natural content and health) can form the basis for a new motivational typology
(Fotopoulos et al., 2009). According to those authors, a future research towards developing
an enhanced, FCQ-originated general food motivation typology should incorporate fewer
dimensions of higher abstraction level and fewer items per dimension. In our study, the
number of questions was modified since we excluded items related to personal expectations
from food and used intrinsic and extrinsic food attributes related to 20 items (see Table II).
The frequency of consumption of the three selected different food products was
measured by a categorical variable (How often do you consume organic food? How often do
you consume traditional dishes? How often do you consume products with a health claim?),
including answers (daily, a few times a week, once a week or less often). Socio-economic
characteristics were also gathered to profile the groups of consumers: age, gender, marital
status, settlement type, education level, health status, and standard of household. A pilot
survey, involving ten respondents in Croatia, was conducted in order to check the clarity of
questions and the relevance of each item.
Sampling and data collection
In this research, the sampling universe was based on Croatian census data and estimated
population dynamics. In order to ensure that the sample was nationally representative,
a three-stage stratified random sampling approach was employed (based on the Kish scheme
selection procedure). In the first stage, polling station territories were identified as primary
sampling units as these provided the most complete register of addresses. Each polling station
territory consists of approximately 200 households, divided by street name(s). This first stage
sampling procedure resulted in 3.5 million potential respondents. In the second stage,
households were drawn at random from polling station territories, further reducing the
potential respondents to 1.5 million people. Finally, 500 respondents were randomly selected out
of the 1.5 million people and interviewed from those households in the polling station territories
(response rate was 70 per cent). Data collection for the main sample (n¼500) occurred via
face-to-face interviews, conducted in the respondents’homes. Data collection took place in
September 2010. These respondents were, therefore, from all the polling station territories in
Croatia, thus making the sample and data collected nationally representative. As a check on the
quality of fieldwork, 10 per cent of interviewed respondents were contacted again after the
interview to check that the interview occurred and that data were collected in accordance with
specified procedures. Table I details the background characteristics of the sample.
Even though the data were gathered at the beginning of economic crises, recent analysis
showed that there are no great differences in consumer behaviour and sales of functional
(Euromonitor, 2016), organic (FiBL & IFOAM –Organics International, 2016), and
traditional (Cerjak et al., 2014) food in the period of 2010-2016.
Data analyses
The data obtained from the survey were initially analysed using univariate methods to
examine frequencies and distributions and to detect possible errors that might have
occurred during data entry.
In order to examine the importance of intrinsic and extrinsic food characteristics by
different consumers, a factor analysis followed by cluster analysis were performed –a
methodology very often used in consumer segmentation (Vanhonacker et al., 2013,
Alamanos et al., 2013; Espinoza-Ortega et al., 2016) .
As input variables in the exploratory factor analyses, 20 FCQ statements were used
(Table II). Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO), measure of sampling adequacy (MSA), and Bartlett’s
test of sphericity were used to determine the suitability of each inter-correlation matrix for
factor analysis (Hair et al., 2010). The principal component method was applied on the
selected variables. An eigenvalue greater than 1 was selected as the criterion for
849
Intrinsic and
extrinsic
quality food
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF ZAGREB At 00:21 30 March 2017 (PT)

Socio-demographic characteristics %
Gender
Female 53.2
Male 46.8
Age (years)
18-34 28.6
35-54 34.6
55+36.8
Mean age 47.6
Education
Elementary school or less 36.0
Secondary school 51.2
Higher or university 12.8
Reported BMI
Underweight (o18.4) 2.3
Normal (18.5-24.9) 44.5
Overweight (25-29.9) 35.9
Obese (Z30) 17.4
Settlement type
Urban 57.6
Rural 42.4
Table I.
Profile of 500
respondents
It is important to me that the food I eat on a typical day Mean
a
SD Factor loading Variance (%)
Factor 1: health and sensory characteristics (α¼0.810) 18.8
Tastes good 4.70 0.556 0.675
Contains natural ingredients 4.54 0.699 0.668
Is nutritious 4.52 0.648 0.616
Smells nice 4.47 0.788 0.535
Contains a lot of vitamins and minerals 4.37 0.792 0.673
Contains no artificial ingredients 4.35 0.892 0.693
Has a pleasant texture 4.26 0.868 0.510
Looks nice 4.06 0.989 0.523
Is high in protein 4.04 0.866 0.511
Factor 2: price and availability (α¼0.753) 13.7
Is good value for money 4.55 0.625 0.528
Is easily available in shops and supermarkets 4.31 0.796 0.584
Is not expensive 4.30 0.868 0.679
Is cheap 4.11 0.975 0.798
Can be bought in shops close to where I live or work 4.08 0.926 0.647
Factor 3: body weight and digestion (α¼0.703) 10.9
Is high in fibre and roughage 3.93 0.945 0.589
Is low in fat 3.87 1.064 0.776
Is low in calories 3.36 1.226 0.808
Factor 4: convenience (α¼0.701) 10.2
Can be cooked very simply 4.11 0.967 0.760
Is easy to prepare 3.73 1.157 0.803
Takes no time to prepare 3.66 1.130 0.602
Note:
a
1–I do not agree at all to 5 –I absolutely agree
Table II.
The factor
loadings matrix
850
BFJ
119,4
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF ZAGREB At 00:21 30 March 2017 (PT)

determining the number of factors to be extracted (Alamanos et al., 2013). In the
interpretation of the factors, variables with loadings greater than 0.5 were used. To ease the
interpretation of each factor, the varimax rotation procedure was performed. And to assess
the internal consistency of the factors, Cronbach’sαcoefficient was used.
The extracted factors scores have been used as standardized weights for input into the
hierarchical cluster analysis in order to prevent possible problems of multicollinearity if
using raw variables (Grunert et al., 2009). Ward method was used as the agglomerative
algorithm to measure the similarity among subjects, as Backhaus et al. (1996) report that it
yields better grouping than other algorithms, as well as squared Euclidian distance
(Hair et al., 2010). A number of clusters was determined based on the dendrogram and
agglomerative schedule obtained from Ward’s method, as well as on the interpretability of
the resulting solutions, e.g. clusters have to be different on the segmentation variables and
have a meaningful size (Hair et al., 2010, Vanhonacker et al., 2013).
χ
2
tests were performed to examine the differences between clusters, i.e. market segments
regarding their socio-demographic characteristics. All statistical analyses were performed
in IBM SPSS 23.0 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL).
Results
Importance of intrinsic and extrinsic attributes for consumers
As evidenced in Table II, consumers are generally very concerned about intrinsic food
characteristics, the most important being taste (the average evaluation of the statement “It is
important to me that the food I eat on a typical day tastes good “had the highest score of
4.7, with 1 meaning “I don’t agree at all”and 5 –“I absolutely agree”) followed by natural
content of the food. The least important intrinsic characteristics of food for consumers, even
though still relatively important, are number of calories (3.36) and fat content (3.87), as well
as easy preparation (3.73) and time needed to prepare food (3.66). Respondents are also
rather sensitive to the value for money (4.55), availability in shops and supermarket (4.31),
and the price of the food they eat (4.30) as the most important extrinsic attributes.
Factors that explain differences among consumers
Results of factor and cluster analyses. The Barlett-test ( χ
2
¼3,022.003; po0.001), the KMO
MSA (0.86), and the KMO criterion (MSA coefficients W0.7) indicated the suitability of the
data for factor analysis. Using factor analysis, four factors were designated explaining
53.6 per cent of the total variance. The factor loadings matrix is shown in Table II.
All extracted factors had good internal reliability consistency (αW0.7). The first factor
named “health and sensory characteristics”is dominating and explains 18.8 per cent of the
variance. This factor contains statements related to intrinsic food characteristics, such as
food’s composition, taste, or smell. The second factor “price and availability”explains
13.7 per cent of the total variance and corresponds to statements connected with food price
and buying convenience (extrinsic food characteristics). The third factor accounts for
10.9 per cent of the variance and is called “body weight and digestion”; it also contains
intrinsic food characteristics. The last factor “food preparation”covers 10.2 per cent of the
variance and refers to the ease and time of food preparation (extrinsic food characteristics).
Obtained factor scores were used to further cluster respondents into four groups,
i.e. consumer segments as shown in the Figure 1.
Discrimination analysis has shown that all four factors have a significant impact on the
differentiation of clusters ( po0.05). Wilks’λcoefficient showed that the second factor of price
and availability (with the lowest coefficient) has the biggest impact on the differentiation of
clusters. In this research, 87.9 per cent of original grouped cases were correctly classified,
which proves that the division of respondents into clusters was not accidental.
851
Intrinsic and
extrinsic
quality food
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF ZAGREB At 00:21 30 March 2017 (PT)

Consumer segments based on the importance of intrinsic and extrinsic food cues
In the interpretation of consumer segments, statements included in the factor analyses were
used, as well as socio-demographic characteristics of consumers (Table III).
Segment 1 –healthy and tasty food lovers (consumers who are concerned about taste and
food composition, but not about availability and price)
Consumers in this segment are very sensitive to intrinsic food properties. They are worried
about additives and artificial food ingredients, and they prefer food with lots of vitamins
and minerals which tastes good. Further, these consumers like food that looks good, i.e. food
with an appealing look. These consumers consider easy food preparation, as well as its
availability in nearby shops and supermarkets, as less important food characteristics than
other consumers. Price is also not that important for healthy and tasty food lovers as for
consumers in other segments.
Healthy and tasty food lovers prefer familiar food and environmentally friendly
packaging. Although most consumers are generally not very concerned that the food they
buy comes from countries which they support politically, healthy and tasty food lovers
find this characteristic even less important than consumers from the other three
elicited segments.
There are slightly more women than men in this segment (56 and 44 per cent,
respectively) and two-thirds of respondents live with partners. Compared to other segments,
there is a higher percentage of highly educated consumers in this segment (24 per cent
of all segment members). A great majority of these consumers consider the state of
their health as good or moderate (62 and 30 per cent, respectively), as well as their
household economic standard (63 and 32 per cent, respectively). This segment accounts for
23.6 per cent of all respondents.
Segment 2 –convenient consumers (consumers who are concerned about price, availability,
and food preparation)
Convenient consumers are mostly concerned about extrinsic quality characteristics
of food. They pay a lot of attention to food preparation, which needs to be fast and easy.
Extrinsic
Intrinsic
Motives/
Statements/
Items
Factors Segments
Health
Convenience Health and Sensory
Characteristics
Healthy and
Tasty Food Lovers
Sensory Appeal Body Weight and
Digestion
Convenient
Consumers
Natural Content Price and Availability Concerned
Consumers
Price Convenience Indifferent
Consumers
Weight Control
Figure 1.
The results of factor
and cluster analyses
852
BFJ
119,4
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF ZAGREB At 00:21 30 March 2017 (PT)

When choosing food, price and availability are very important characteristics for
these consumers.
Convenient consumers care much less than others about the natural content of food, or
about its composition (low in fat, high in fibre). They do not attach personal values
to food, and it is not important that the food they eat reminds them of the food they ate
when they were children. They also consider the country of origin as less important than
other consumers.
Males (58 per cent of all convenient consumers), single consumers (34 per cent), and those
younger than 40 (47 per cent) are more represented in this segment than in other segments.
The majority of convenient consumers come from urban areas, i.e. 72 per cent of them –the
highest share in all segments. About two-thirds of convenient consumers have finished
secondary school, and a further 12 per cent finished college or faculty education. Less than
5 per cent of convenient consumers evaluate the state of their health as bad while 63 per cent
evaluate it as good, and the remaining 32 per cent as moderate. In all, 26.9 per cent of all
respondents are placed in this segment.
Segments
Socio-demographic
characteristic and attitudes Healthy and tasty
food lovers (%) Convenient
consumers (%) Concerned
consumers (%) Indifferent
consumers (%) p-value
(χ
2
)
Age (years)
o30 17.8 27.6 14.7 17.4 0.017
30-40 21.5 19.5 14.7 21.7
41-55 29.0 21.1 28.7 30.4
56-70 years 25.2 18.7 20.6 22.8
W70 6.5 13.0 21.3 7.6
Gender
Male 44.0 57.7 36.0 52.7 0.003
Female 56.0 42.3 64.0 47.3
Marital status
Single, not living with a
partner 19.4 34.1 19.1 25.0 0.003
Cohabiting (living together
with partner)/married 66.7 49.6 52.2 58.7
Used to be married
(divorced, widowed) 13.9 16.3 28.7 16.3
Education
Elementary or less 30.3 26.0 35.0 52.2 0.000
Secondary 45.9 61.8 52.6 43.5
Higher or university 23.9 12.2 12.4 4.3
Type of settlement
Urban 54.6 72.4 62.5 27.2 0.000
Rural 45.4 27.6 37.5 72.8
Rate your overall current state of health?
Bad 8.3 4.1 12.5 13.0 0.032
Moderate 29.6 32.5 41.2 30.4
Good 62.0 63.4 46.3 56.5
Rate the standard of your household?
Bad 8.3 13.8 21.3 23.1 0.026
Moderate 48.1 44.7 49.3 39.6
Good 43.5 41.5 29.4 37.4
Table III.
Differences between
segments per their
socio-demographic
characteristics and
attitudes towards
health and household
status
853
Intrinsic and
extrinsic
quality food
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF ZAGREB At 00:21 30 March 2017 (PT)

Segment 3 –concerned consumers (consumers who are concerned about all characteristics,
except food preparation)
Concerned consumers are the second largest consumer segment (27.2 per cent). They are
very concerned about both intrinsic and extrinsic food characteristics. These consumers
find it very important that food does not contain additives and artificial ingredients, but that
it has a lot of vitamins, minerals, and a high protein content. More so than the others,
they prefer food low in calories, with low fat and high fibre content. Food texture is most
important for concerned consumers. The availability of the food they are buying, countries
of origin, as well as its appearance are also most important for consumers from this
segment. On the other hand, these consumers also care a lot about food price and the value
they get for their money.
More so than for other consumers, it is important for concerned consumers that food has
a good influence on their mood and health and is familiar to them.
This segment is the oldest one, with the average age of 52 years. Two-thirds of members
of this segment are female consumers representing the highest share of female consumers in
one segment. Less than half of these consumers consider the state of their health as good
(46 per cent), but only 29 per cent believe they have a good household standard.
Segment 4 –indifferent consumers (consumers who are indifferent towards all food
characteristics)
Food is relatively unimportant to indifferent consumers, since, mostly, they do not care as
much as the others about the majority of intrinsic and extrinsic food characteristics.
These consumers are least worried about food additives and artificial ingredients but also
about food taste and its nutritional value. As with healthy and tasty food lovers, the price of
food they buy is not that important for them. The impact of food on consumers’mood and
health is also less important to indifferent consumers compared to the others.
There is an almost equal number of male and female consumers in this segment
(53 per cent and 47 per cent, respectively). Compared to the others, indifferent consumers
have the lowest level of education; 52 per cent of them have finished only elementary school.
A great majority of these consumers (73 per cent) –contrary to the other segments –live in
rural areas. As with concerned consumers, indifferent consumers evaluate the state of their
health and economic status less so than consumers in the other two segments. This is the
smallest segment comprising 19.9 per cent of all respondents.
Relationship between identified consumer segments and the consumption frequency of
different types of food products (traditional, organic, and functional). In order to examine if
there are differences between detected segments regarding their frequency of consumption
of different types of food products (traditional, functional, and organic), we performed
χ
2
tests (Table IV).
Segment 1 –healthy and tasty food lovers –these consumers consider taste and food
composition as more important compared to food price and availability, so these consumers
most frequently eat all three types of specialty food. Almost half stated that they eat organic
food on a daily basis, a bit more than a half eat functional food a few times a week, and
two-thirds eat traditional food a few times a week.
Segment 2 –convenient consumers –compared to other segments, they eat traditional
and organic food less frequently but more functional foods than concerned and indifferent
consumers. As these consumers are price sensitive and concerned about food availability,
they consume organic food less often than traditional and functional food due to its higher
prices and lower availability in the market.
Segment 3 –concerned consumers –these consumers are concerned not only with
intrinsic but also extrinsic food characteristics, including food price and availability, and
854
BFJ
119,4
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF ZAGREB At 00:21 30 March 2017 (PT)

Consumer segments (%)
Traditional food Functional food Organic food
How often
do you
consume?
Healthy
and tasty
food lovers Convenient
consumers Concerned
consumers Indifferent
consumers
Healthy
and tasty
food lovers Convenient
consumers Concerned
consumers Indifferent
consumers
Healthy
and tasty
food lovers Convenient
consumers Concerned
consumers Indifferent
consumers
Daily 37.6 19.5 42.6 36.7 31.2 29.3 18.2 13.0 44.0 22.6 32.4 29.7
A few
times a
week 30.3 25.2 15.4 16.7 21.1 16.3 11.7 9.8 21.1 11.3 12.5 14.3
Once a
week 17.4 32.5 26.5 18.9 8.3 22.8 22.6 17.4 6.4 21.8 8.8 7.7
Less often 14.7 22.8 15.4 27.8 39.4 31.7 47.4 59.8 28.4 44.4 46.3 48.4
Table IV.
Differences between
segments according to
consumers’frequency
of consumption of
different type of food
products
855
Intrinsic and
extrinsic
quality food
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF ZAGREB At 00:21 30 March 2017 (PT)

so they consume analysed specialty food less often than healthy and tasty food lovers,
but consume traditional and organic foods more often than convenient and indifferent
consumers. Concerned consumers showed a lower consumption frequency of functional
food compared to the other two groups of products, possibly due to a lower confidence
in such claims.
Segment 4 –indifferent consumers –these consumers are least interested in food and,
therefore, the highest share of these consumers, compared to other segments, eat analysed
specialty foods less than once a week. They consume traditional and organic food more
often than functional food.
Overall, there is consistency between food consumption patterns and motivation profiles
based on FCQ.
Discussion and conclusion
Importance of intrinsic and extrinsic attributes for evaluation of quality
The highest rating intrinsic motive for Croatian consumers, such as sensory appeal and
health, are the same as for consumers in Great Britain (Steptoe et al., 1995), Russia
(Honkanen and Frewer, 2009), Hungary and Romania (Januszewska et al., 2011), and Poland
(Gutkowska and Ozimek, 2005). Sensory motives were the most important determinants of
food choice in this study confirming the previous results of Wandel and Bugge (1997)
and Magnusson et al. (2001). The health characteristics of food are very important to
Croatian consumers.
Price and availability is the second most important characteristic for Croatian consumers
and it reflects Eertmans et al. (2006) results for Belgian consumers. Price is reported by
many authors (Murphy et al., 2000; Iop et al., 2006; Jáuregui-Lobera and Bolaños Ríos, 2011)
as an important variable in consumer food choice. Despite its importance, price was not the
principal attribute that influences consumer choice, according to the Iop et al. (2006), Kupiec
and Revell (2001) and Murphy et al. (2000).
Weight control was found to be in third place on the list of important motives for dietary
choices of Croatian consumers, just like it is for consumers in Hungary and Romania
( Januszewska et al., 2011).
Convenience was found to be a less important motive for food choice than sensory
appeal, health, price, and weight control. The same results are found in Italy (Eertmans et al.,
2006), Russia (Honkanen and Frewer, 2009), and Romania ( Januszewska et al., 2011).
To increase the generalizability of the research results, this study incorporated many
intrinsic and extrinsic quality food characteristics. In general, the validation study of the
FCQ in Croatia covers the requirements for evaluating the motivation of consumers in
choosing foods based on specific attributes, both intrinsic and extrinsic.
Relationships between intrinsic and extrinsic attributes, purchasing motives and
socio-demographics
Cluster analysis has been used by many authors for segmentation in the field of consumer
food science (e.g. Heinemann et al., 2006; Schnettler et al., 2009). The cluster analysis defined
four groups of consumers with different socio-economics and demographic characteristics,
demonstrating the usefulness of FCQ (related to intrinsic and extrinsic characteristic of food
quality) for distinguishing food consumer segments. This way of segmenting groups could
help policy makers develop more informed and targeted food safety programmes. It was
also approved that these consumer segments have different consumption patterns
regarding specialty foods such as traditional, organic, and functional food.
Healthy and tasty food lovers are very sensitive to intrinsic food characteristics.
They rank “sensory appeal and health”as more important motives. Sloan (2003) reported
856
BFJ
119,4
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF ZAGREB At 00:21 30 March 2017 (PT)

that “nowadays consumers are more interested in nutritious, healthy, and convenient
foods”. This segment of consumers is probably very sensitive to the messages from health
campaigns, and they are potential consumers of organic food (Zakowska Biesman, 2011).
Therefore, consumers in this segment eat all three types of analysed specialty foods more
often than other consumers.
Convenientconsumers are mostly concernedabout extrinsic quality characteristics of food.
When choosing food, they place emphasis on its price and availability. Rappaport et al.
(1992) found that health motives were negatively correlated with convenience
while sensory appeal was unrelated. For this group of consumers, promotion of ready
to eat meals would be suitable. They are more prone to traditional and functional food
than to organic food.
Concerned consumers are very much worried both about intrinsic and extrinsic food
characteristics. They have more knowledge on food and are more prone to traditional food,
which is in line with the profile identified by Weatherell et al. (2003).
Indifferent consumers place less importance on the majority of intrinsic and extrinsic
food characteristics. A similar group is also identified by Honkanen and Frewer (2009) in
their study of Russian consumers. They found that this group was less motivated and
interested in food, comprising of a relatively high share of males with a relatively low
income and level of education. In Croatia, on the other hand, this group consists of almost an
equal number of males and females. Žakowska Biemans (2011) and Honkanen and Frewer
(2009) found that it is very common in food studies to find a group which has a lower overall
interest in food. They eat specialty foods less often as compared to the other segments.
Implication for the food industry
Information on consumers’attitudes towards food, the importance of different food quality
characteristics, and their relationships with the consumption patterns of different types of
food is pertinent to health psychology, food manufacturers, and distributors to support
developing communication strategies. Appropriate strategies for health promotion may be
developed for segments with different attitudes and motives. The recognition of health
status in comparison with other motives in the selection of food can help in the
implementation and effectiveness of health promotion strategies.
This study could help decrease a gap between consumer dietary choices and healthful
dietary regimes, public information policies, social marketing, and other promotional
activities aimed at behavioural change. It could also impact regulatory and other
policies that shape the ways in which foods are produced, manufactured, distributed,
and promoted.
Moreover, the study paid attention to the heterogeneity of consumers, which is very often
neglected in designing and implementing social marketing and educational campaigns that
have tendency to assume that “one size fits all”(Forthofer and Bryant, 2000; Boslaugh et al.,
2005). The results could serve to both enhance the efficacy of communication efforts and to
improve their cost efficiency.
Research limitations
There are certain limitations of this study. Only intrinsic and extrinsic characteristics from
the FCQ were examined, while some other extrinsic cues, such as country of origin, brand
name, etc. which can have significant importance in food consumers’choice, have not been
considered. This research is only limited to three differentiated food products. Also, there
was strong tendency among respondents to agree with the items in FCQ, which can indicate
acquiescence bias. Furthermore, a single item self-reported measure was used as an
indicator of consumption frequency. The subjective nature of this approach makes it
sensitive to social desirability and self-serving biases, which can lessen the discriminative
857
Intrinsic and
extrinsic
quality food
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF ZAGREB At 00:21 30 March 2017 (PT)

power of data. The questionnaire is concerned with the factors that are theoretically
perceived as relevant to food choice, and these factors do not necessarily reflect actual
dietary selection behaviour. Finally, the generalizability of results could be limited as all
respondents were based in the Croatia where consumption behaviour and cultural factors
may differ as compared to other parts of the world.
References
Acebrón, L.B. and Dopico, D.C. (2000), “The importance of intrinsic and extrinsic cues to expected and
experienced quality: an empirical application for beef”,Food Quality and Preference, Vol. 11
No. 3, pp. 229-238.
Ahmadov, V. (2008), “Consumer preferences for differentiated food products”, doctoral dissertation,
Washington State University, Washington, DC, available at: www.dissertations.wsu.edu/
Dissertations/Spring2008/v_ahmadov_042508.pdf (accessed 23 February 2016).
Alamanos, E., Bourlakis, M. and Tzimitra-Kalogianni, I. (2013), “Segmenting Greek tomato consumers:
policy and marketing insights towards a healthy diet”,British Food Journal, Vol. 115 No. 4,
pp. 488-507.
Amuquandoh, E.F. and Asafo-Adjei, R. (2013), “Traditional food preferences of tourists in Ghana”,
British Food Journal, Vol. 115 No. 7, pp. 987-1002.
Asioli, D., Canavari, M., Pignatti, E., Obermowe, T., Sidali, K.L., Vogt, C. and Spiller, A. (2014), “Sensory
experiences and expectations of Italian and German organic consumers”,Journal of
International Food and Agribusiness Marketing, Vol. 26 No. 1, pp. 13-27.
Backhaus, K., Erichson, B., Plinke, W. and Weiber, R. (1996), Multivariate Analysemethoden,
Springer, Berlin.
Boslaugh, S.E., Kreuter, M.W., Nicholson, R.A. and Naleid, K. (2005), “Comparing demographic, health
status and psychosocial strategies of audience segmentation to promote physical activity”,
Health Education Research, Vol. 20 No. 4, pp. 430-438.
Brečić, R., Gorton, M. and Barjolle, D. (2014), “Understanding variations in the consumption of
functional foods –evidence from Croatia”,British Food Journal, Vol. 116 No. 4, pp. 662-675.
Carrillo, E., Varela, P., Salvador, A. and Fiszman, S. (2011), “Main factors underlying consumers’food
choice: a first step for the understanding of attitudes toward ‘healthy eating’”,Journal of
Sensory Studies, Vol. 26 No. 2, pp. 85-95.
Cerjak, M. and Tomić, M. (2015), “Buying motives and trust of young consumers for functional
fermented dairy products: evidence from croatian students”,Journal of International Food and
Agribusiness Marketing, Vol. 27 No. 3, pp. 177-187.
Cerjak, M., Haas, R., Brunner, F. and Tomić, M. (2014), “What motivates consumers to buy traditional
food products? Evidence from Croatia and Austria using word association and laddering
interviews”,British Food Journal, Vol. 116 No. 11, pp. 1726-1747.
Cerjak, M., Mesić,Ž., Kopić, M., Kovačić, D. and Markovina, J. (2010), “What motivates consumers to
buy organic food: comparison of Croatia, Bosnia Herzegovina, and Slovenia”,Journal of Food
Products Marketing, Vol. 16 No. 3, pp. 278-292.
Chryssochoidis, G., Krystallis, A. and Perreas, P. (2007), “Ethnocentric beliefs and country-of-origin
(COO) effect: impact of country, product and product attributes on Greek consumers’evaluation
of food products”,European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 41 Nos 11/12, pp. 1518-1544.
Cranfield, J., Henson, S. and Masakure, O. (2011), “Factors affecting the extent to which consumers
incorporate functional ingredients into their diets”,Journal of Agricultural Economics, Vol. 62
No. 2, pp. 375-392.
Diplock, A.T., Aggett, P., Ashwell, M., Bornet, F., Fern, E. and Roberfroid, M. (1999), “Scientific
concepts of functional food science in Europe: consensus document”,British Journal of Nutrition,
Vol. 81 No. 1, pp. 1-28.
858
BFJ
119,4
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF ZAGREB At 00:21 30 March 2017 (PT)

Eertmans, A., Victoir, A., Notelaers, G., Vansant, G. and Van den Bergh, O. (2006), “The Food Choice
Questionnaire: factorial invariant over western urban populations?”,Food Quality and
Preference, Vol. 17 No. 5, pp. 344-352.
Enneking, U., Neumann, C. and Henneberg, S. (2007), “How important intrinsic and extrinsic product
attributes affect purchase decision”,Food Quality and Preference, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 133-138.
Erickson, G.M., Johansson, J.K. and Chao, P. (1984), “Image variables in multi-attribute product
evaluations: country-of-origin effects”,Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 11 No. 2, pp. 694-699.
Espejel, J., Fandos, C. and Flavián, C. (2007), “The role of intrinsic and extrinsic quality attributes on
consumer behaviour for traditional food products”,Managing Service Quality: An International
Journal, Vol. 17 No. 6, pp. 681-701.
Espinoza-Ortega, A., Martínez-García, C.G., Thomé-Ortiz, H. and Vizcarra-Bordi, I. (2016), “Motives
for food choice of consumers in Central México”,British Food Journal, Vol. 118 No. 11,
pp. 2744-2760.
Esteve, M., Paus, M., Barjolle, D.and Bernardoni, P. (2011), “Perspectives et limites du développement de
filières sous indications géographiques dans les Balkans”,Économie Rurale, Vol. 5 Nos 325-326,
pp. 145-157.
Euromonitor (2016), “Yoghurt and sour milk products in Croatia”, Euromonitor Passport Database,
September, available at: www.euromonitor.com/yoghurt-and-sour-milk-products-in-croatia/
report (accessed 23 September 2016).
Fandos, C. and Flavián, C. (2006), “Intrinsic and extrinsic quality attributes, loyalty and buying
intention: an analysis for a PDO product”,British Food Journal, Vol. 108 No. 8, pp. 646-662.
FiBL & IFOAM –Organics International (2016), The World of Organic Agriculture, Frick and Bonn,
available at: https://shop.fibl.org/fileadmin/documents/shop/1698-organic-world-2016.pdf
Forthofer, M.S. and Bryant, C.A. (2000), “Using audience-segmentation techniques to tailor health
behavior change strategies”,American Journal of Health Behavior, Vol. 24 No. 1, pp. 36-43.
Fotopoulos, C., Krystallis, A., Vassallo, M. and Pagiaslis, A. (2009), “Food Choice Questionnaire (FCQ)
revisited. Suggestions for the development of an enhanced general food motivation model”,
Appetite, Vol. 52 No. 1, pp. 199-208.
GajdošKljusuric, J., Čačić, J., Misir, A. and Čačić, D. (2015), “Geographical region as a factor influencing
consumers’perception of functional food –case of Croatia”,British Food Journal, Vol. 117 No. 3,
pp. 1017-1031.
Grunert, K.G. (2002), “Current issues in the understanding of consumer food choice”,Trends in Food
Science and Technology, Vol. 13 No. 8, pp. 275-285.
Grunert, K.G., Larsen, H.H., Madsen, T.K. and Baadsgaard, A. (1996), “Market orientation in food and
agriculture: summary, implications, and research perspectives”,Market Orientation in Food and
Agriculture, Kluwer Academic Publisher, Norwell, MA, pp. 243-253.
Grunert, K.G., Juhl, H.J., Esbjerg, L., Jensen, B.B., Bech-Larsen, T., Brunso, K. and Madsen, C.O. (2009),
“Comparing methods for measuring consumer willingness to pay for a basic and an improved
ready made soup product”,Food Quality and Preference, Vol. 20 No. 8, pp. 607-619.
Guerrero, L., Guàrdia, M.D., Xicola, J., Verbeke, W., Vanhonacker, F., Zakowska-Biemans, S. and
Scalvedi, M.L. (2009), “Consumer-driven definition of traditional food products and innovation in
traditional foods: a qualitative cross-cultural study”,Appetite, Vol. 52 No. 2, pp. 345-354.
Gutkowska, K. and Ozimek, I. (2005), Wybrane aspekty zachowańkonsumentów na rynku żywności –
kryteria zróżnicowania, Wydawnictwo SGGW, Warszawa.
Hair, J.F., Black, W.C., Tatham, R.L. and Anderson, R.E. (2010), Multivariate Data Analysis, 7th ed.,
Prentice Hall International, London.
Heinemann, R.J.B., Behrens, J.H. and Lanfer-Marquez, U.M. (2006), “A study on the acceptability and
consumer attitude towards parboiled rice”,International Journal of Food Science and
Technology, Vol. 41 No. 6, pp. 627-634.
859
Intrinsic and
extrinsic
quality food
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF ZAGREB At 00:21 30 March 2017 (PT)

Hemmerling, S., Hemmerling, S., Canavari, M., Canavari, M., Spiller, A. and Spiller, A. (2016),
“Preference for naturalness of European organic consumers: first evidence of an attitude-liking
gap”,British Food Journal, Vol. 118 No. 9, pp. 2287-2307.
Henson, S., Masakure, O. and Cranfield, J. (2008), “The propensity for consumers to offset health risks
through the use of functional foods and nutraceuticals: the case of lycopene”,Food Quality and
Preference, Vol. 19 No. 4, pp. 395-406.
Herne, S. (1995), “Research on food choice and nutritional status in elderly people: a review”,
British Food Journal, Vol. 97 No. 9, pp. 12-29.
Hidalgo-Milpa, M., Arriaga-Jordán, C.M., Cesín-Vargas, A. and Espinoza-Ortega, A. (2016),
“Characterisation of consumers of traditional foods: the case of Mexican fresh cheeses”,
British Food Journal, Vol. 118 No. 4, pp. 915-930.
Hoefkens, C., Verbeke, W. and Van Camp, J. (2011), “European consumers’perceived importance of
qualifying and disqualifying nutrients in food choices”,Food Quality and Preference, Vol. 22
No. 6, pp. 550-558.
Honkanen, P. and Frewer, L. (2009), “Russian consumers’motives for food choice”,Appetite, Vol. 52
No. 2, pp. 363-371.
Iop, S.C.F., Teixeira, E. and Deliza, R. (2006), “Consumer research: extrinsic variables in food studies”,
British Food Journal, Vol. 108 No. 11, pp. 894-903.
Januszewska, R., Pieniak, Z. and Verbeke, W. (2011), “Food Choice Questionnaire revisited in four
countries. Does it still measure the same?”,Appetite, Vol. 57 No. 1, pp. 94-98.
Jáuregui-Lobera, I. and Bolaños Ríos, P. (2011), “What motivates the consumer’s food choice?”,
Nutricion Hospitalaria, Vol. 26 No. 6, pp. 1313-1321.
Krystallis, A., Chryssochoidis, G. and Scholderer, J. (2007), “Consumer-perceived quality in ‘traditional’
food chains: the case of the greek meat supply chain”,Appetite, Vol. 48 No. 1, pp. 54-68.
Kupiec, B. and Revell, B. (2001), “Measuring consumer quality judgements”,British Food Journal,
Vol. 103 No. 1, pp. 7-22.
Lee, M. and Lou, Y.C. (2011), “Consumer reliance on intrinsic and extrinsic cues in product evaluations:
a conjoint approach”,Journal of Applied Business Research, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 21-29.
Lindeman, M. and Väänänen, M. (2000), “Measurement of ethical food choice models”,Appetite, Vol. 34
No. 1, pp. 55-59.
Lockie, S., Lyons, K., Lawrence, G. and Mummery, K. (2002), “Eating ‘green’: motivations behind
organic food consumption in Australia”,Sociologia Ruralis, Vol. 42 No. 1, pp. 23-40.
Loizou, E., Michailidis, A. and Chatzitheodoridis, F. (2013), “Investigating the drivers that influence the
adoption of differentiated food products: the case of a Greek urban area”,British Food Journal,
Vol. 115 No. 7, pp. 917-935.
Magnusson, M.K., Arvola, A., Koivisto Hursti, U.K., Åberg, L. and Sjödén, P.O. (2001), “Attitudes
towards organic foods among Swedish consumers”,British Food Journal, Vol. 103 No. 3,
pp. 209-227.
Markovina, J., Stewart-Knox, B.J., Rankin, A., Gibney, M., de Almeida, M.D.V., Fischer, A. and Frewer, L.J.
(2015), “Food4Me study: validity and reliability of Food Choice Questionnaire in 9 European
countries”,Food Quality and Preference,Vol.45No.10,pp.26-32.
Moro, D., Veneziani, M., Sckokai, P. and Castellari, E. (2015), “Consumer willingness to pay for
Catechin-enriched yogurt: evidence from a stated choice experiment”,Agribusiness, Vol. 31 No. 2,
pp. 243-258.
Mueller, S. and Szolnoki, G. (2010), “The relative influence of packaging, labelling, branding and
sensory attributes on liking and purchase intent: consumers differ in their responsiveness”,
Food Quality and Preference, Vol. 21 No. 7, pp. 774-783.
Murphy, M., Cowan, C., Henchion, M. and O’Reilly, S. (2000), “Irish consumer preferences for honey:
a conjoint approach”,British Food Journal, Vol. 102 No. 8, pp. 585-598.
860
BFJ
119,4
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF ZAGREB At 00:21 30 March 2017 (PT)

Olson, J. and Jacoby, J. (1972), “Cue utilization in the quality perception process”,Proceedings of the
Third Annual Conference of the Association for Consumer Research, Association for Consumer
Research,Iowa City, pp. 167-179.
Olson, J.C. (1977), “Price as an informational cue: effects in product evaluation”, in Woodside, A.G.,
Sheth, J.N. and Bennet, P.D. (Eds), Consumer and industrial buying behaviour, North-Holland
Publishers, New York, NY, pp. 267-286.
Özen, A.E., Bibiloni, M., Pons, A. and Tur, J.A. (2014), “Consumption of functional foods in Europe;
a systematic review”,Nutrition Hospital, Vol. 29 No. 3, pp. 470-478.
Ozimek, I. and Zakowska-Biemans, S. (2011), “Determinants of polish consumers’food choices and their
implication for the national food industry”,British Food Journal, Vol. 113 No. 1, pp. 138-154.
Pieniak, Z., Perez-Cueto, F. and Verbeke, W. (2013), “Nutritional status, self-identification as a
traditional food consumer and motives for food choice in six European countries”,British Food
Journal, Vol. 115 No. 9, pp. 1297-1312.
Prescott, J., Young, O., O’neill, L., Yau, N.J.N. and Stevens, R. (2002), “Motives for food choice: a
comparison of consumers from Japan, Taiwan, Malaysia and New Zealand”,Food Quality and
Preference, Vol. 13 No. 7, pp. 489-495.
Pula, K., Parks, C.D. and Ross, C.F. (2014), “Regulatory focus and food choice motives. Prevention
orientation associated with mood, convenience, and familiarity”,Appetite, Vol. 78 No. 1, pp. 15-22.
Rao, A.R. and Monroe, K.B. (1989), “The effect of price, brand name, and store name on
buyers’perceptions of product quality: an integrative review”,Journal of Marketing Research,
Vol. 26 No. 3, pp. 351-357.
Rappaport, L., Peters, G., Huff-Corzine, L. and Downey, R. (1992), “Reasons for eating: an exploratory
cognitive analysis”,Ecology of Food and Nutrition, Vol. 28 No. 3, pp. 171-189.
Renko, N., Butigan, R. and Renko, S. (2011), “The development of organic food sector in western Balkan
countries –result of Delphi method”,VII International Agribusiness PAA-PENSA Conference,
Buenos Aires, Argentina,November 30-December 2, pp. 862-878.
Renko, S. and Bucar, K. (2014), “Sensing nostalgia through traditional food: an insight from Croatia”,
British Food Journal, Vol. 116 No. 11, pp. 1672-1691.
Schnettler, B. and Grunert, K.G. (2016), “The relation between attitudes toward functional foods and
satisfaction with food-related life”,British Food Journal, Vol. 118 No. 9, pp. 2234-2250.
Schnettler, B., Vidal, R., Silva, R., Vallejos, L. and Sepulveda, N. (2009), “Consumer willingness to pay
for beef meat in a developing country: the effect of information regarding country of origin, price
and animal handling prior to slaughter”,Food Quality and Preference, Vol. 20 No. 2, pp. 156-165.
Shepherd, R. (1999), “Social determinants of food choice”,Proceedings of the Nutrition Society, Vol. 58
No. 4, pp. 807-812.
Sloan, A.E. (2003), “What consumers want-and don’t want-on food and beverage labels”,
Food Technology, Vol. 57 No. 11, pp. 26-36.
Steenkamp, J.B.E. (1990), “Conceptual model of the quality perception process”,Journal of Business
Research, Vol. 21 No. 4, pp. 309-333.
Steenkamp, J.-B.E.M. (1997), “Dynamics in consumer behavior with respect to agricultural and food
products”, in Wierenga, B., Tilburg, A., van Grunert, K., Steenkamp, J.-B.E.M. and Wedel, M.
(Eds), Agricultural Marketing and Consumer Behavior in a Changing World, Springer,
pp. 143-188.
Steenkamp, J.B.E. and Baumgartner, H. (1998), “Assessing measurement invariance in cross-national
consumer research”,Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 78-90.
Steptoe, A., Pollard, T.M. and Wardle, J. (1995), “Development of a measure of the motives underlying
the selection of food: the Food Choice Questionnaire”,Appetite, Vol. 25 No. 3, pp. 267-284.
Sun, Y.H.C. (2008), “Health concern, food choice motives, and attitudes toward healthy eating:
the mediating role of food choice motives”,Appetite, Vol. 51 No. 1, pp. 42-49.
861
Intrinsic and
extrinsic
quality food
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF ZAGREB At 00:21 30 March 2017 (PT)

Trichopoulou, A., Soukara, S. and Vasilopoulou, E. (2007), “Traditional foods: a science and society
perspective”,Trends in Food Science and Technology, Vol. 18 No. 8, pp. 420-427.
Vanhonacker, F., Van Loo, E.J., Gellynck, W. and Verbeke, W. (2013), “Flemish consumer attitudes
towards more sustainable food choices”,Appetite, Vol. 62 No. 1, pp. 7-16.
Vickers, Z.M. (1993), “Incorporating tasting into a conjoint analysis of taste, health claim, price and
brand for purchasing strawberry yogurt”,Journal of Sensory Studies, Vol. 8 No. 4, pp. 341-352.
Wandel, M. and Bugge, A. (1997), “Environmental concern in consumer evaluation of food quality”,
Food Quality and Preference, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 19-26.
Weatherell, C., Tregear, A. and Allinson, J. (2003), “In search of the concerned consumer: UK
public perceptions of food, farming and buying local”,Journal of Rural Studies, Vol. 19 No. 2,
pp. 233-244.
Žakowska Biemans, S. (2011), “Polish consumer food choices and beliefs about organic food”,
British Food Journal, Vol. 113 No. 1, pp. 122-137.
Žeželj, I., Milošević, J., Stojanović,Ž. and Ognjanov, G. (2012), “The motivational and informational
basis of attitudes toward foods with health claims”,Appetite, Vol. 59 No. 3, pp. 960-967.
Corresponding author
Željka Mesićcan be contacted at: zmesic@agr.hr
For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
862
BFJ
119,4
Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF ZAGREB At 00:21 30 March 2017 (PT)