|dc.description.abstract||Studies one through three used a between groups design. However this design did not permit an understanding of how different evoked context influenced the same group of consumers. Hence in the fourth study, a counterbalanced, within-subjects design was used to compare liking with and without an evoked context of, four blackcurrant juices. While all consumers evaluated samples both with and without the evoked context, half evaluated samples in the evoked context first, while the other half evaluated samples without context first. The context evoked was 'having something refreshing to drink.' Similar conclusions regarding the effects of evoked context and hedonic ratings were reported using the within subjects design, as when a between subjects design was used. However, when juices were rated in the first evaluation session in the evoked context, hedonic ratings were lower than without an evoked context (p<O.OOJ). When juices were rated in the first session without an evoked context, hedonic ratings were lower than in the evoked context (p=0.035). A group effect may be evident with a between subjects design. Tentatively, multiple contexts should not be evoked in immediate succession for evaluation of a single product type.
In the fifth study, the effect of evoked context on hedonic responses was compared when using the 9-point hedonic scale and best-worst hedonic scaling. The same four blackcurrant juices that were discriminated for mean liking using the 9-point hedonic scale under the evoked context condition in the fourth study (p<O.OOJ), were equally liked using best-worst hedonic scaling (p=0.931). Best-worst hedonic scaling discriminated mean liking for four commercial apple juices when context was evoked (p<O.OOJ). Although the same apple juices were equally liked in the evoked context (p=0.407) when using the 9-point hedonic scale, liking differed in the control condition (p<O.OOJ). Consumers found best-worst hedonic scaling more difficult to use than the 9-point hedonic scale when a context was evoked. Different hedonic information may be elicited in evoked contexts when using the best-worst hedonic scale, a preference method, compared to the 9-point hedonic scale, an acceptance method.
This research developed a method to evoke consumption contexts in a laboratory test setting and explored its influence on consumer hedonic response of products. Findings from this research contribute to the field of consumer sensory science by providing industry and sensory researchers with a method that incorporates a product's consumption context in a laboratory setting, and compares how acceptance and preference measurement techniques affect hedonic responses. Evoking context using a written scenario may serve as a product development tool to explore product liking under different consumption contexts that may not be feasible to carry out due to practical or financial reasons. Further research is needed to understand the liking for different products using different types of context, and to understand the effects of hedonic measurement techniques on different product sets.||en_NZ