Content uploaded by Kosuke Motoki
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Kosuke Motoki on Nov 07, 2022
Content may be subject to copyright.
1
Multiple senses influencing healthy food preference
Kosuke Motoki1* & Taku Togawa2
This is an accepted version of a paper published in
Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences
1 Department of Management, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan
2 Faculty of Economics, Department of Management, Sophia University, Tokyo, Japan
*Correspondence should be addressed to Kosuke Motoki, Department of Management,
The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan
E-mail: motoki@e.u-tokyo.ac.jp
2
Abstract
The worldwide prevalence of obesity and lifestyle diseases has increased the importance
of healthy eating. Understanding consumer preferences for healthy food could lead to
healthier food consumption and help mitigate public health concerns. Continued
research in food science, marketing, and consumer psychology has demonstrated that
healthy food preferences can be shaped by multiple senses. We review recent research
on the effects of visual, auditory, olfactory, and tactile cues on consumers’ evaluations,
choices, and intake of healthy foods. Our review also highlights the promising role of
multisensory virtual environments and educational interventions in fostering healthy
food preferences. Finally, based on this review, we discuss directions for future
research.
3
Introduction
With the exacerbation of health-related issues, such as obesity and lifestyle diseases
caused by eating habits, research aiming to enhance healthy eating behavior has become
increasingly vital [1]. In this review, we define healthy food as food that is high in
nutrients and low in calories/fat/sugar (e.g., [2,3]). Previous studies have shown that
behavioral decisions on food (e.g., purchasing or intake) can be determined in relation
to all five senses [4]*. For instance, while purchasing, visual elements, such as package
color and advertisement images, influence food product choices [5,6]. During
consumption, tactile experiences, including mouthfeel and food temperature, affect the
amount of food intake [7]. While studies have comprehensively reviewed marketing and
nutrition literature on food, few studies have focused on sensory influences on healthy
eating behavior. Considering the social and academic significance of healthy eating, it is
crucial to review and organize existing knowledge on the influence of multisensory
experiences on healthy eating behaviors [6,8]. Thus, the present cross-disciplinary paper
reviews recent food studies and outlines existing findings on how sensory inputs affect
healthy eating behavior, such as food choice and intake. A graphical illustration of this
review is presented in Figure 1.
Vision
4
Vision is the most widely studied sense among the five senses [9]. Previous research
has investigated the relationship between visual (e.g., color, shape) and food attributes
(e.g., perceived healthfulness) [10,11]. More relevant to the present review, increasing
evidence has revealed that visual attributes extending from more basic levels (e.g.,
color, shape) [12–17] to more sophisticated levels (e.g., artistic design) influence
preference for healthy food [2,18,19*].
Color
Color research on marketing and consumer behavior has attracted attention for many
years [9]. Lighting has been considered as a key factor of color perception. Recent
studies have investigated the effects of brightness in lighting on healthy food
preferences [12,13], and they have consistently shown that participants in a brightly lit
room tend to choose a healthy snack (e.g., banana) compared to those in a dimly lit
room. In addition to ambient factors such as lighting, verbal or visual elements of
communications can also influence healthy eating decisions. For instance, Wang et al.
showed that health-focused advertising messages with black and white colors positively
influenced consumer attitudes (including advertisements, restaurants, purchasing
intention, and willingness to pay) [14] (also see [20]). Additionally, some researchers
have focused on the role of traffic light colors on labels in food choices. Kunz et al.
5
showed that a label colored green (vs. a colorless label) increased purchase intention
toward products with low sugar levels [18].
Not surprisingly, the colors of food itself also determine consumers’ eating decisions.
Recent research has applied digital image analysis to explore color parameters
influencing consumer preferences [19*, 21]. Paakki et al. showed that the color
parameters of food images influenced healthy food preferences [19]*. The color
parameters (L*, a*, b*) of salad images were calculated using digital image analyses.
Colorful salads were preferred over pale salads. Moreover, salads with great variation in
red-green (a*) and dark-light colors (L*) were rated as higher in terms of preferences
than those with less variation in red-green and dark-light colors. Digital image analyses
may help explore the color parameters of real-world visual elements (e.g.,
advertisements, interior, packaging, and logos) that influence consumer preferences for
healthy food.
Shape
Specific properties of shape, such as roundness and slimness, influence healthy food
preferences [11,17,22,23]. For example, Wang et al. showed that angular shapes were
more associated with healthy food, whereas round shapes were more linked to
unhealthy food. Moreover, consumers tended to prefer healthy foods with angular
6
shapes (i.e., angular wholegrain bread) compared to healthy foods with round shapes
(i.e., circular wholegrain bread). However, other studies have not found significant
effects of angular shape on healthy food preferences [11,22,23]. One study showed that
round-shaped packages or typefaces were preferred over angular-shaped packages or
typefaces regardless of whether the food was healthy or not [11,23]. It has also been
shown that round (vs. angular) shapes increase preferences for indulgent foods, while
the effects of angular versus round shapes on healthy food preferences were non-
significant [22].
Additionally, the perception of healthiness can be engendered by the slim design of
packages. Yarar et al. investigated how the slimness of a package influenced the
evaluation of food healthfulness [24]. Packaging mimicking a slim humanoid was
perceived as healthier than packaging resembling a less slim humanoid. Moreover, the
effects of package slimness were more pronounced in women and those with higher
body mass index. Although this study did not test the downstream effects on
preferences, slim packaging may have increased healthy food preferences, and the
effects were more pronounced in women and those with higher body mass
index. Moreover, given that there are exceptions in the marketplace where slim
packaging is not associated with healthiness (e.g., Coca-Cola bottles and other
7
carbonated juices), future research is needed to identify boundary conditions or
moderators determining the effect of slim packaging on healthiness perception.
Position
Healthy eating behavior can be driven by the vertical or horizontal position of food
imagery on a display or package façade. For example, Togawa et al. hypothesized that a
food image placed at the bottom (vs. top) of the package façade would enhance flavor
richness and perceived satiety, resulting in healthy eating decisions (e.g., decreasing
consumption and choosing a healthy option) [25]. In an experiment, participants were
asked to watch a short film while eating popcorn. To manipulate the position of the
imagery, a picture of popcorn was placed at the bottom or top of the package façade. As
hypothesized, participants in the bottom (vs. top) condition perceived the flavor as
richer and ate less popcorn. Wang and Basso also documented a metaphorical
association between vertical representation and healthiness [26], in that that people
associated healthy foods with a higher (vs. lower) vertical position. Specifically, people
perceived a food product as healthier when it was pictured from a low (vs. high) camera
angle such that the viewer would seem to be looking up (vs. looking down) at
it. However, these two studies provided mixed results. In the former study, the lower
8
(vs. higher) location of packaging imagery promoted healthy eating (e.g., reducing
consumption) [25], whereas the latter study showed that higher (vs. lower) vertical
position was associated with healthiness [26]. This suggests that the association between
vertical positions and food healthiness can lead to different results depending on two
stages of food consumption: the point-of-purchase (i.e., judgment of healthiness) [26]
and the consumption stage (i.e., health-conscious eating) [25]. Moreover, given that
food positioning is also associated with specific food taste (i.e., a higher position is
associated with sweetness) [27], the effects of vertical positioning on healthy food
preferences may differ depending on what kind of taste consumers associate with that
positioning.
There is also a mental association between horizontal positions and food healthiness.
To investigate this association, Manippa et al. conducted four experiments wherein data
were collected and assessed using multiple methods, such as Likert scales and the
Visual Analogue Scale [28]. The results showed that when a “Healthy” label was
displayed on the left (right) side of a screen, participants were more likely to categorize
foods as healthier (higher calorie). Moreover, low-calorie (high-calorie) foods were
preferred when presented on the left (right) side of the screen. Another study focusing
on both vertical and horizontal positions replicated these findings [29]; that is,
9
participants preferred low-calorie (vs. high-calorie) foods and indicated a more intense
desire to eat when food imagery was displayed on the top or left (vs. bottom or right)
side of the screen. Moreover, one study investigated the role of the position of
transparent windows on packaging designs on food preferences [30]. The results
demonstrated that the top- and bottom-right (vs. top- and bottom-left) windows
enhanced preferences for healthy food (e.g., granola) [30].
Visual aspects of materials
Consumers infer food healthfulness from visual aspects of materials [31,32].
Recent research has investigated the visual perception effects of materials on healthy
food preferences [32]. Consumers tended to perceive food with matte (vs. glossy)
packages as healthier. Furthermore, consumers motivated to engage in healthy eating
were more likely to choose food products with matte (vs. glossy) packages. These
findings suggest that the visual aspects of materials (e.g., matte) influence cues of food
healthfulness and nudge consumers to healthier food choices.
Visual aesthetic elements
Aesthetic elements can help enhance preferences for healthy foods [2,8]. Research has
shown that the visual aesthetic presentation of food increases healthy food preferences
10
[8]. Kandinsky-inspired artistic plating increased the liking, willingness to pay, and
perceived palatability of salads in comparison with regular and neat presentations [8].
Moreover, visual aesthetic elements such as symmetry and balance in a dish affected
food preferences [33,34]. For example, across a series of experiments, Hagan
investigated how and when the aesthetics of foods, manipulated by balance and
symmetry, influenced perceived healthfulness and choice of (healthy) foods [2] (see also
[15,35]). Specifically, aesthetic appearance (symmetry + balance) increased the
willingness to pay for healthy food (bell pepper) via increased perceived healthfulness.
Furthermore, an intervention to capitalize on the aesthetic elements of food increased
children’s preference for healthy foods [36]*. Children participated in a workshop on
creating artistic plating of foods or an unrelated creativity workshop. The artistic
workshop conditions enhanced children’s preference for healthy sweets (e.g., Spinach
sponge cake) previously used in the workshop when compared with the results from the
unrelated creativity workshop condition.
Audition
People’s healthy food preferences can be affected by auditory experience through
background music or brand names.
Background music/noise
11
Previous studies have investigated the effects of background music on healthy food
preferences [37–40]. Their focus can be classified broadly into two subcategories:
musical attributes and types. In terms of the first subcategory, two studies demonstrated
that playing music or noise with a higher (vs. lower) pitch [41] and lower (vs. higher)
volume [37] increased the choices for and sales of healthy food.
Research in the latter category has found that music genres influence consumers’
healthy food preferences [38–40]. For example, classical and jazz music increased
preferences for healthy foods (e.g., vegetable sandwiches) more than rock or heavy
metal music [38]. Similarly, soft nature sounds (e.g., the sound of ocean waves)
increased preferences for healthy foods rather than unhealthy foods [40]. Interestingly, it
has also been suggested that white noise decreases sweetness and saltiness intensity, that
is, consumers prefer sweeter and saltier foods when they are in a noisy environment
[42,43], which might affect consumers’ healthy food preferences.
Sound branding
Research has shown that particular sounds in brand names or sonic logos are
associated with healthy foods [44,45]. For example, Motoki et al. tested whether sounds
embedded in fictitious brand names modulated the perceived appropriateness of healthy
food names. The results demonstrated that higher-frequency sounds (i, e, f, s) in
12
fictitious brand names were rated as more appropriate for healthy food names than
lower-frequency sounds (b, d, g, u, o) in fictitious brand names. This suggests that
sounds in brand names might influence preferences for healthy foods.
Olfaction
Olfactory cues play a significant role in eating decisions [46]. Specifically, recent
studies have examined the role of ambient odors in food selection, intake, and appetite
[47]. The effects of ambient odors seem to be specific to congruent food (i.e., similar
types of food from which the odor originates) [48]. For example, ambient healthy food
odors (e.g., fruit odors) increased the selection of fruits and vegetables [48]. However,
contradictory findings have also been reported [48]. Perceiving healthy food odors (i.e.,
cucumber and melon) did not increase healthy (or low-calorie) food preferences [48].
Differing exposure times to odors (i.e., longer or shorter exposure durations) may
explain these contradictory findings [48]. Recent research has revealed that the exposure
time to odors modulates how odors influence healthy food preferences [49].
Specifically, people were more likely to choose healthy foods when exposed to an
ambient scent of indulgent versus non-indulgent foods (i.e., chocolate chip cookies vs.
strawberries) for a long time (more than two minutes) [49].
13
Other characteristics of odors (the temperature dimension of odor) also influence
healthy food preferences [50]. Lefebvre and Biswas examined the role of ambient scent
temperature in healthy food preferences. The presence of a metaphorically warm
ambient odor (e.g., cedarwood) increased the choice of healthy (lower-calorie) food
options more than the presence of a metaphorically cool ambient odor (e.g., eucalyptus)
[50].
Touch
Healthy food preferences can be affected by specific attributes of touch, such as
temperature, weight, and texture. For example, warm foods are perceived as having
more calories and satiation than cold foods [7,51]. Baskentli et al. demonstrated that
purchasing cold (vs. warm) foods was more likely to lead to ordering more
complementary items (e.g., a bag of chips, cookies) [51]. In contrast, ambient
temperature does not influence healthy food preferences [52].
One study found that a food’s weight influenced evaluation of the food as healthy [53].
Consumers tended to associate physical weight with greater perceived healthiness of
food because physically lighter food was regarded as having fewer calories. Given
consumers’ intuition in this regard, consumers may prefer lightweight, healthy foods.
Furthermore, the weight of bowls in which food was served influenced the perceived
14
density of food [54], which possibly leads to faster satiation and, thus, healthy eating
behavior.
Van Rompay et al. investigated the effects of 3D-printed surface textures on healthy
food preferences [55]*. A between-participant experiment was conducted using three
surface textures (smooth, rough, and rough or irregular) and three salt contents (low,
medium, and high). Significant interactions were found for healthy food preferences
(indexed by a willingness to try healthy product variants). In medium and high salt
conditions, a smooth texture resulted in a lower willingness to try than a rough or
irregular texture. Conversely, in the low salt condition, a smooth texture led to a higher
willingness to try than a rough or irregular texture.
Multiple senses
Multisensory virtual environments
Some recent studies have focused on multisensory virtual environments to facilitate
healthy food preferences [56*–59]. For example, Pennanen et al. designed three
conditions: a peaceful nature VR environment (sunny day picnic), an uncomfortable VR
environment (sudden rain shower picnic), and a control (blank canvas) [56]*. In the
peaceful nature VR environment, participants viewed a mountain valley with natural
15
sounds (birds, wind, and rain) and subtle background music (Figure 2). Among the
various environments presented, participants rated healthy (rye nacho) and unhealthy
(milk chocolate) snacks. The results demonstrated that the peaceful nature VR
environment increased the liking of and desire for a healthy snack more than the control
condition. Although an alternative account whereby participants associated situational
factors (e.g., birdsong and mountain views reminiscent of breakfast) with specific foods
(e.g., chocolate) was considered plausible, the results of the study suggest the possibility
of using multisensory virtual environments to enhance consumers’ acceptance of
healthy foods.
Multisensory educational intervention
Multisensory exposure intervention in preschool children (three- to four-years-old)
increases healthy food preference [60]* (see also [61]). Children in intervention groups
participated in activities involving unisensory (visual) or multisensory (smell/visual or
smell/touch/visual) exposure to vegetables. The two multisensory exposure
interventions increased the preference for the exposed vegetables more than the
unisensory intervention. These findings suggest that multisensory activities provide a
promising avenue to increase the acceptance of healthy foods.
16
Conclusions
We reviewed recent research on the multisensory influences on healthy food
preferences. This review identified that multisensory cues, including visual, auditory,
olfactory, and tactile cues, can enhance consumers’ food evaluations, choices, and intake
of healthy foods. Furthermore, it highlighted the promising role of multisensory virtual
environments and educational interventions to foster healthy food preferences.
This review provides an avenue for future research. In the current literature, less
attention has been paid to touch than other sensations, such as vision and audition.
Future research should broadly investigate how haptic information on food, plates, and
cutlery affects healthy eating decisions. Moreover, only a limited number of studies
have focused on multisensory effects; however, given the complexity of the interplay
between human sensations, further extensive research needs to be conducted to examine
how, when, and why multisensory experiences affect healthy eating behaviors.
Acknowledgments
Funding
This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public,
commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
Conflict of interest statement
17
None declared.
References and recommended reading
Papers of particular interest published within the period of review have been highlighted
as follows:
• of special interest
References
[1] Swinburn BA, Kraak VI, Allender S, Atkins VJ, Baker PI, Bogard JR, Brinsden H,
Calvillo. A, De Schutter O, Devarajan R, et al.: The global syndemic of obesity,
undernutrition, and climate change: The Lancet Commission report. Lancet 2019,
393:791–846.
[2] Hagen L: Pretty healthy food: How and when aesthetics enhance perceived
healthiness. J Mark 2021, 85:129–145.
[3] Gill T, Lei J, Kim HJ: Adding more portion-size options to a menu: A means to
nudge consumers to choose larger portions of healthy food items. Appetite 2022,
169:105830.
[4]* Spence C: Sensehacking: How to Use the Power of Your Senses for Happier,
Healthier Living. Penguin UK; 2021.
[5] Velasco C, Spence C (Eds.): Multisensory Packaging: Designing New Product
Experiences. Springer; 2019.
[6] Spence C: Gastrophysics: Nudging consumers toward eating more leafy (salad)
greens. Food Qual Prefer 2020, 80:103800.
[7] Yamim AP, Mai R, Werle COC: Make it hot? How food temperature (mis)guides
product judgments. J Consum Res 2020, 47:523–543.
18
[8] Michel C, Velasco C, Gatti E, Spence C: A taste of Kandinsky: assessing the
influence of the artistic visual presentation of food on the dining experience. Flavour
2014, 3:1–11.
[9] Sample KL, Hagtvedt H, Brasel SA: Components of visual perception in marketing
contexts: A conceptual framework and review. J Acad Mark Sci 2020, 48:405–421.
[10] Reinoso-Carvalho F, Campo R, De Luca M, Velasco C: Toward Healthier Cookie
Habits: Assessing the role of packaging visual appearance in the expectations for dietary
Cookies in Digital Environments. Front Psychol 2021, 12:679443.
[11] Marques da Rosa V, Spence C, Miletto Tonetto L: Influences of visual attributes of
food packaging on consumer preference and associations with taste and healthiness. Int
J Consum Stud 2019, 43:210–217.
[12] Chan EY: Brightness motivates healthy behaviors: The role of self-accountability.
Environ Behav 2021, 54:363–382.
[13] Biswas D, Szocs C, Chacko R, Wansink B: Shining light on atmospherics: How
ambient light influences food choices. J Mark Res 2017, 54:111–123.
[14] Wang B, Liu SQ, Kandampully J, Bujisic M: How color affects the effectiveness of
taste- versus health-focused restaurant advertising messages. J Advert 2020, 49:557–
574.
[15] Schifferstein HNJ, Wehrle T, Carbon C-C: Consumer expectations for vegetables
with typical and atypical colors: The case of carrots. Food Qual Prefer 2019, 72:98–
108.
[16] Howell BF, Schifferstein HNJ: How neutral coloured backgrounds affect the
attractiveness and expensiveness of fresh produce. Food Qual Prefer 2019, 78:103718.
[17] Wang J, Zhang X, Jiang J: Healthy-angular, unhealthy-circular: Effects of the fit
between shapes and healthiness on consumer food preferences. J Bus Res 2022,
139:740–750.
[18] Kunz S, Haasova S, Rieß J, Florack A: Beyond healthiness: The impact of traffic
light labels on taste expectations and purchase intentions. Foods 2020, 9:34.
19
[19]* Paakki M, Sandell M, Hopia A: Visual attractiveness depends on colorfulness and
color contrasts in mixed salads. Food Qual Prefer 2019, 76:81–90.
[20] Del Gatto C, Indraccolo A, Imperatori C, Brunetti R: Hungry for colours?
Attentional bias for food crucially depends on perceptual information. Cogn Process
2021, 22:159–169.
[21] Motoki K, Takahashi A, Spence C: Tasting atmospherics: Taste associations with
colour parameters of coffee shop interiors. Food Qual Prefer 2021, 94:104315.
[22] Zhou S, Chen S, Li S: The shape effect: Round shapes increase consumers’
preference for hedonic foods. Psychol Mark 2021, 38:2051–2072.
[23] Wang L, Yu Y, Li O: The typeface curvature effect: The role of typeface curvature
in increasing preference toward hedonic products. Psychol Mark 2020, 37:1118–1137.
[24] Yarar N, Machiels CJA, Orth UR: Shaping up: How package shape and consumer
body conspire to affect food healthiness evaluation. Food Qual Prefer 2019, 75:209–
219.
[25] Togawa T, Park J, Ishii H, Deng X: A packaging visual-gustatory correspondence
effect: Using visual packaging design to influence flavor perception and healthy eating
decisions. J Retail 2019, 95:204–218.
[26] Wang F, Basso F: The peak of health: The vertical representation of healthy food.
Appetite 2021, 167:105587.
[27] Velasco C, Adams C, Petit O, Spence C: On the localization of tastes and tasty
products in 2D space. Food Qual Prefer 2019, 71:438–446.
[28] Manippa V, Giuliani F, Brancucci A: Healthiness or calories? Side biases in food
perception and preference. Appetite 2020, 147:104552.
[29] Manippa V, Ferracci S, Pietroni D, Brancucci A: Can the position on the screen of
an image influence its judgment? The case of high- and low-calorie foods. Food Qual
Prefer 2022, 96:104407.
[30] Simmonds G, Woods AT, Spence C: “Seeing what’s left”: The effect of position of
transparent windows on product evaluation. Foods 2018, 7:151.
20
[31] Kerpel LD, De Kerpel L, Volles BK, Van Kerckhove A: Fats are glossy but does
glossiness imply fatness? The influence of packaging glossiness on food perceptions.
Foods 2020, 9:90.
[32] Ye N, Morrin M, Kampfer K: From glossy to greasy: The impact of learned
associations on perceptions of food healthfulness. J Consum Psychol 2019, 32:1.
[33] Rowley J, Spence C: Does the visual composition of a dish influence the
perception of portion size and hedonic preference? Appetite 2018, 128:79–86.
[34] Velasco C, Michel C, Woods AT, Spence C: On the importance of balance to
aesthetic plating. Int J Gastron Food Sci 2016, 5-6:10–16.
[35] Bolos LA, Lagerkvist C-J, Normann A, Wendin K: In the eye of the beholder:
Expected and actual liking for apples with visual imperfections. Food Qual Prefer 2021,
87:104065.
[36]* Maiz E, Urkia I, Bereciartu A, Urdaneta E, Allirot X: Introducing novel fruits and
vegetables: Effects of involving children in artistic plating of food. Food Qual Prefer
2019, 77:172–183.
[37] Biswas D, Lund K, Szocs C: Sounds like a healthy retail atmospheric strategy:
Effects of ambient music and background noise on food sales. J Acad Mark Sci 2019,
47:37–55.
[38] Motoki K, Takahashi N, Velasco C, Spence C: Is classical music sweeter than jazz?
Crossmodal influences of background music and taste/flavour on healthy and indulgent
food preferences. Food Qual Prefer 2022, 96:104380.
[39] Peng-Li D, Mathiesen SL, Chan RCK, Byrne DV, Wang QJ: Sounds healthy:
Modelling sound-evoked consumer food choice through visual attention. Appetite 2021,
164:105264.
[40] Peng-Li D, Andersen T, Finlayson G, Byrne DV, Wang QJ: The impact of
environmental sounds on food reward. Physiol Behav 2021, 245:113689.
[41] Huang X (I), Labroo AA: Cueing morality: The effect of high-pitched music on
healthy choice. J Mark 2020, 84:130–143.
21
[42] Woods AT, Poliakoff E, Lloyd DM, Kuenzel J, Hodson R, Gonda H, Batchelor J,
Dijksterhuis GB, Thomas A: Effect of background noise on food perception. Food Qual
Prefer 2010, 22:42–47.
[43] Spence C: Tasting in the air: A review. Int J Gastron Food Sci 2017, 9:10–15.
[44] Techawachirakul M, Pathak A, Calvert GA: That sounds healthy!: Audio and visual
frequency differences in brand sound logos modify the perception of food healthfulness.
Food Qual Prefer 2022, 99:104544
[45] Motoki K, Park J, Pathak A, Spence C: Constructing healthy food names: On the
sound symbolism of healthy food. Food Qual Prefer 2021, 90:104157.
[46] Spence C: Leading the consumer by the nose: On the commercialization of
olfactory design for the food and beverage sector. Flavour 2015, 4:31.
[47] Morrin M, Tepper BJ: Multisensory marketing: Effects of environmental aroma
cues on perception, appetite, and consumption of foods and drinks. Curr Opin Food Sci
2021, 40:204–210.
[48] Morquecho-Campos P, de Graaf K, Boesveldt S: Smelling our appetite? The
influence of food odors on congruent appetite, food preferences and intake. Food Qual
Prefer 2020, 85:103959.
[49] Biswas D, Szocs C: The smell of healthy choices: Cross-modal sensory
compensation effects of ambient scent on food purchases. J Mark Res 2019, 56:123–
141.
[50] Lefebvre S, Biswas D: The influence of ambient scent temperature on food
consumption behavior. J Exp Psychol Appl 2019, 25:753–764.
[51] Baskentli S, Block L, Morrin M: The serving temperature effect: Food temperature,
expected satiety, and complementary food purchases. Appetite 2021, 160:105069.
[52] Motoki K, Saito T, Nouchi R, Kawashima R, Sugiura M: The paradox of warmth:
Ambient warm temperature decreases preference for savory foods. Food Qual Prefer
2018, 69:1–9.
[53] Li Y, Heuvinck N, Pandelaere M: The light = healthy intuition. J Consum Psychol
2022, 32:326–335.
22
[54] Piqueras-Fiszman B, Harrar V, Alcaide J, Spence C: Does the weight of the dish
influence our perception of food? Food Qual Prefer 2011, 22:753–756.
[55]* van Rompay T, van Ooijen I, Groothedde S, Saakes D: (Not to be taken) with a
grain of salt: Enhancing perceived saltiness by 3D-printed surface textures. Food Qual
Prefer 2021, 93:104279.
[56]* Pennanen K, Närväinen J, Vanhatalo S, Raisamo R, Sozer N: Effect of virtual
eating environment on consumers’ evaluations of healthy and unhealthy snacks. Food
Qual Prefer 2020, 82:103871.
[57] Hoppu U, Puputti S, Mattila S, Puurtinen M, Sandell M: Food consumption and
emotions at a salad lunch buffet in a multisensory environment. Foods 2020, 9:1349.
[58] Sinesio F, Saba A, Peparaio M, Saggia Civitelli E, Paoletti F, Moneta E: Capturing
consumer perception of vegetable freshness in a simulated real-life taste situation. Food
Res Int 2018, 105:764–771.
[59] van Bergen G, Zandstra EH, Kaneko D, Dijksterhuis GB, de Wijk RA: Sushi at the
beach: Effects of congruent and incongruent immersive contexts on food evaluations.
Food Qual Prefer 2021, 91:104193.
[60]* Roberts AP, Cross L, Hale A, Houston-Price C: VeggieSense: A non-taste
multisensory exposure technique for increasing vegetable acceptance in young children.
Appetite 2022, 168:105784.
[61] Youssef J, Mora M, Maiz E, Spence C: Sensory exploration of vegetables
combined with a cookery class increases willingness to choose/eat plant-based food and
drink. Int J Gastron Food Sci 2022, 28:100515.
23
Figure Captions
Figure 1. A graphical illustration summarizing the review
Figure 2*. The multisensory virtual environment used in Pennanen et al. [52].
*Reprinted from Pennanen et al. [52] with permission from Elsevier.
24
Figures
Figure 1
25
Figure 2
