Information Behaviour of Food Consumers: A Systematic Literature Review and a Future Research Agenda
Abstract
:1. Introduction
- -
- To identify trends and patterns in the literature, providing a holistic account of the literature on food information consumer behaviour, based on current knowledge about a set of key research themes;
- -
- To suggest an agenda addressing new research directions in this field of study.
2. Methodology
What do we know about consumers’ perceived value of food information? Which promising and underdeveloped research lines can be identified to address gaps and future developments?
2.1. Paper Location and Selection
- The set I, including terms related to the theoretical domain, i.e., human information behaviour (e.g., “information need arousal”, “need for information”, “information seeking”, “information behaviour”, “consumer behaviour”, as well as synonymous, and other broader/more broad terms). These terms were defined in the extant literature on information usage [11];
- The set F, including terms related to the application domain, i.e., the term “food”, other terms used for major food groups and categories, and terms related to main activities along the food consumption process (e.g., food purchasing, storage, cooking, eating, disposal) [26].
- Articles published in peer-reviewed journals. This selection criterion was already adopted in many organizational studies (e.g., [23,24,25]), where authors agree that excluding papers that could have less scientific rigour (such as monographs, book chapters, conference proceedings) will ensure better content quality;
- Language: we selected only papers written in English;
- Subject area: we considered papers published in a journal indexed at least in one of the following subject areas: business, management and accounting; engineering; economics, econometrics and finance; decision sciences;
- Conceptual boundaries: the paper is focused on aspects characterizing the interaction between consumers and food information.
2.2. Papers Analysis
- Information need arousal: the process of information need arousal begins when consumers realize that they have an immediate food-related need or a specific lack of knowledge in the food domain. This prompts consumers to seek out information in order to fulfil that need. Consumers then formulate an information-related question that is specific to a particular stage of food consumption, such as purchasing, storing, preparing, consuming, or disposing of food, in order to make an informed choice;
- Information seeking: in this stage, consumers are actively and deliberately engaged in the process of acquiring information. From a decision-making perspective, individuals must select the most suitable information channel and source to fulfil their food-related information needs;
- Information contextualization and use: after the appropriate food information has been selected, consumers can use it to make informed decisions related to food-related activities. The meaning and use of this information is determined by the specific context in which it is being utilized.
3. Results
3.1. The Role of Consumers’ Attitudes and Motivations in Information Need Arousal
- Healthiness and safety (T1). Some studies emphasized the role of health and safety factors as the main motives behind consumers’ food decisions [41,42,43,44]. All of these studies have in common that they have been focused on the behaviour of consumers towards organic food. Recently, Rana and Paul [45] carried out a meta-analytic review to investigate health-related motives influencing the organic food purchasing decision. Although the degree of correlation identified in most of the analysed studies differed, health factors are positively correlated with consumer attitudes towards organic food, undoubtedly representing a fundamental element in their purchasing behaviour. From an information-oriented perspective, some survey-based researchers found that consumers with health and safety-related interests have a continuous and more intense need for information about food [46]. We have identified that information sought by this type of consumer mainly concerns nutritional aspects (e.g., calories, fat, protein, carbs) [1], nutritional and wellness related properties (e.g., anticancer, anti-ageing) [47] and the presence of microbiological and chemical contaminants in food products [48]. In this last paper, the authors found that consumers expressed higher interest towards chemical contaminants (as compared with microbial), as they are associated with potentially severe long-term consequences;
- Convenience. Some studies addressed convenience as the primary motivation guiding consumer choices along the food consumption process [49]. According to Hjelmar [50], convenience behaviour is a typical characteristic of pragmatic consumers. Raimundo et al. [51] found that a convenience attitude negatively correlates with health consciousness and cooking enjoyment. Information needs arising in consumers whose primary interest is towards food costs and convenience deal with utilitarian benefits during food-related activities, e.g., finding the nearest food store, buying food at a lower price [52], how to reduce time and manage a budget [51];
- Cultural and emotional: some studies are explicitly devoted to investigating the relationship between related cultural aspects and food consumption behaviour. There is a stream of literature related to religious prescriptions and consumer behaviour. Razzaque and Chaudhry [53] found that religious commitment is an antecedent forming Muslim consumers’ purchasing decisions. Similar results were found by Della Corte et al. [54], where differences in food consumption behaviour between religious and non-religious people towards halal and kosher food, respectively, have been investigated. Cultural interests and consumers’ behaviours towards food have mainly been studied in the literature. Elements attributable to tradition and food culture have proven to be very important in the decision-making process of some categories of consumers. In contrast, other attributes widely used in the marketing strategies of consumer products (e.g., advertising, labelling and packaging) did not prove to be decisive for the final choice of the consumer [55,56]. In this case, the association between food and territory feeds a positive cognitive process towards the perception of food quality [57]. Unfortunately, there is limited research on the impact of cultural factors and attitudes towards food-related information needs. Some studies have attempted to connect these interests to individuals who are particularly interested in food (referred to as “foodies”) and have a constant desire for self-education [58,59]. Additionally, a few studies have specifically examined the connection between the enjoyment of food and the arousal of information needs, exploring the emotions associated with food and how they influence information seeking behaviours [60];
- Ethical: several studies addressed consumers’ attitudes towards ethical aspects of food consumption. These studies tackled consumers’ attention towards social and environmental concerns, i.e., ethical consumerism. Many of these studies concern consumers’ attention to food loss and waste reduction [61,62]. Some studies have delved into the examination of consumers’ preferences and needs for information regarding ethical and sustainable food practices, such as fair-trade certification, integration of disabled individuals, fair pricing for farmers, protection of biodiversity, animal welfare and protection against child labour [63]. Additionally, other research has explored consumers’ interest in information related to environmentally sustainable practices, such as reducing greenhouse gas emissions and protecting tropical rainforests [64].
3.2. Features of Information Channels for Food Information Seeking
- Food Information Availability: this topic includes papers focused on identifying benefits linked to information channel availability, in terms of time and place. In particular, the use of the internet and mobile channels have the potential to move past certain limitations of traditional information sources, such as product labels, radio and television, as they allow consumers to retrieve information at any time and location [66]. Some studies have demonstrated the influence of channel availability on consumers’ choices of information source [67,68];
- Food information channel usability: this topic deals with research addressing how some information channels can reduce cognitive and physical efforts of food consumers in information seeking [69,70]. Some studies investigated consumers’ intentions to search for food information through social media platforms, compared to traditional media, concerning several categories of information cues, e.g., safety [71] or health [72]. Sfodera et al. [73] found that social networks influence food consumers’ decisions since peer-to-peer information exchange reduces risk perception concerning traditional sources;
- Source credibility and attractiveness: much research recognized source credibility as the main determinant influencing consumers’ choices of food information sources. Some empirical studies identified factors affecting the credibility of a food information source. Two central aspects were identified: perceived expertise (i.e., the degree to which a recipient perceives the source as having capabilities and experience to provide accurate information [74]; and trustworthiness (i.e., the confidence that a source provides objective and correct information) [75]. Empirical based research has been devoted to investigating the level of trust that consumers have in food information sources and the factors that influence this trust. [76,77]. Most of the studies focus on the role of labelling and certification in increasing consumers’ trustworthiness towards food products and producers [78,79,80,81]. Moreover, we found few studies explicitly focusing on information source attractiveness, i.e., the extent to which an information source is able to capture the attention of consumers through the use of physical or technology-mediated communication methods. Few recent studies emphasized the role of influencers in food-related communication. They mainly focused their communication on the beauty, the healthiness and the taste of food. Through social networks, food companies aim to involve enthusiastic and committed followers with the support and testimonials of influencers [82]. Ragelienė and Grønhøj [83] confirmed that the impact of famous persons is still significant for the development of consumption behaviours and food preferences.
3.3. Consumer Behaviour in Food Information Contextualization and Use
- Consumer’s ability in using food information: this research topic includes papers focused on identifying factors influencing the ability of consumers to give meaning and contextualize food information cues when they are involved in some food consumption activities. Most of the studies we found focused on consumers’ abilities to use label information to carry out purchasing decisions and/or dietary changes [84,85,86,87]. Some studies provided evidence for the role of demographic characteristics (such as age, gender, ethnicity) in shaping consumers’ abilities to use food information [88,89], as well as culture, education and knowledge [90,91,92,93];
- Food information quality characteristics: we found only three papers examining how much food information used depends on the information quality (e.g., accuracy, completeness, timeless) a consumer receives. Van der Merve et al. [94] focused on consumer preferences about information content format. Akram et al. [95] delved into the importance of accuracy, up-to-datedness and attractiveness of food information in influencing consumer behaviour of fast-food mobile commerce services. Very recently, Wu et al. [96] investigated the effect of perceived information quality on purchasing intention behaviour towards organic food;
- Food Information adaptiveness and contextualization: we found two studies that highlight, albeit indirectly, the importance of information content dynamically adaptable to the context in which consumers make decisions. These studies refer to the consumer’s acceptance of intelligent packages capable of detecting food data and providing context-based information (e.g., temperature, humidity, food spoilage) [97,98].
4. Discussion and Emerging Research Agenda
4.1. The Role of Food Information in Assessing Food Consumption Experiences: A Cue Utilization Theory Perspective
4.2. Intelligent Food Services for Information Asymmetry Reduction and ConsumerEmpowerment
“Could intelligent food services contribute to reducing information asymmetries, empowering consumers in their food consumption activities? How do smart food services impact consumers’ perception of food information concerning traditional information services?”
4.3. Business Model Innovation in the Food Information Provision Market
“Which stakeholders in food supply chains are interested in providing food information services? What is the value proposition they release? What value do these services have for the business of each stakeholder (which value capture)? What is the role of consumers in the food information provision ecosystem?”
4.4. Consumers’ Readiness towards Emerging Food Information Services
4.5. A Model Framework of Consumer Perceived Information Value of Food Marketing Communications
5. Conclusions
Limitations
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Spiteri Cornish, L.; Moraes, C. The impact of consumer confusion on nutrition literacy and subsequent dietary behavior. Psychol. Mark. 2015, 32, 558–574. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Krizan, A.; Merrier, P.; Logan, J.; Williams, K. Business Communication, 7th ed.; Southwestern College Pub: Richmond, VA, USA, 2008. [Google Scholar]
- Cairns, G.; Angus, K.; Hastings, G.; Caraher, M. Systematic reviews of the evidence on the nature, extent and effects of food marketing to children. A retrospective summary. Appetite 2008, 62, 209–215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Capacci, S.; Mazzocchi, M.; Shankar, B.; Macias, J.; Verbeke, W.; Pérez-Cueto, F.; D’Addesa, D.A. Policies to promote healthy eating in Europe: A structured review of policies and their effectiveness. Nutr. Rev. 2012, 70, 188–200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- MacRae, R.; Szabo, M.; Anderson, K.; Louden, F.; Trillo, S. Empowering the Citizen-Consumer: Re-Regulating Consumer Information to Support the Transition to Sustainable and Health Promoting Food Systems in Canada. Sustainability 2012, 4, 2146–2175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Berthon, P.R.; Pitt, L.F.; Plangger, K.; Shapiro, D. Marketing meets web 2.0, social media, and creative consumers: Implications for international marketing strategy. Bus. Horiz. 2012, 55, 261–271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rutsaert, P.; Pieniak, Z.; Regan, Á.; McConnon, Á.; Kuttschreuter, M.; Lores, M.; Verbeke, W. Social media as a useful tool in food risk and benefit communication? A strategic orientation approach. Food Policy 2014, 46, 84–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gao, Q.; Tian, Y.; Tu, M. Exploring factors influencing Chinese user’s perceived credibility of health and safety information on weibo. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2015, 45, 21–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Verbeke, W. Agriculture and the food industry in the information age. Eur. Rev. Agric. Econ. 2005, 32, 347–368. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nguyen, T.T.M.; Phan, T.H.; Nguyen, H.L.; Dang, T.K.T.; Nguyen, N.D. Antecedents of purchase intention toward organic food in an asian emerging market: A study of urban vietnamese consumers. Sustainability 2019, 11, 4773. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Browne, G.J.; Cheung, C.M.; Heinzl, A.; Riedl, R. Human Information Behavior. Bus. Inf. Syst. Eng. 2017, 59, 1–2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Rana, J.; Paul, J. Consumer behavior and purchase intention for organic food: A review and research agenda. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2017, 38, 157–165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kushwah, S.; Dhir, A.; Sagar, M.; Gupta, B. Determinants of organic food consumption. A systematic literature review on motives and barriers. Appetite 2019, 143, 104402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Dhir, A.; Talwar, S.; Kaur, P.; Malibari, A. Food waste in hospitality and food services: A systematic literature review and framework development approach. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 270, 122861. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chauhan, C.; Dhir, A.; Akram, M.U.; Salo, J. Food loss and waste in food supply chains. A systematic literature review and framework development approach. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 295, 126438. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bouhid, L.; Hou, M.A.; Saidi, A. The Consumer’s Perception Of Labeled Agri-Food Products. Int. J. Account. Financ. Audit. Manag. Econ. 2021, 2, 124–150. [Google Scholar]
- Torma, G.; Thøgersen, J. A Systematic Literature Review on Meta Sustainability Labeling–What Do We (not) Know? J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 293, 126194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rosado-Serrano, A.; Paul, J.; Dikova, D. International franchising: A literature review and research agenda. J. Bus. Res. 2018, 85, 238–257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hao, A.W.; Paul, J.; Trott, S.; Guo, C.; Wu, H.H. Two decades of research on nation branding: A review and future research agenda. Int. Mark. Rev. 2019, 38, 46–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kaur, P.; Dhir, A.; Talwar, S.; Alrasheedy, M. Systematic literature review of food waste in educational institutions: Setting the research agenda. Int. J. Contemp. Hosp. Manag. 2021, 33, 1160–1193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Denyer, D.; Tranfield, D.; Van Haken, J.E. Developing design propositions through research synthesis. Organ. Stud. 2008, 29, 393–415. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Durach, C.F.; Kembro, J.H.; Wieland, A. How to advance theory through literature reviews in logistics and supply chain management. Int. J. Phys. Distrib. Logist. Manag. 2021, 51, 1090–1107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ammirato, S.; Felicetti, A.M.; Rogano, D.; Linzalone, R.; Corvello, V. Digitalising the Systematic Literature Review process: The MySLR platform. Knowl. Manag. Res. Pract. 2022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Felicetti, A.M.; Ammirato, S.; Corvello, V.; Iazzolino, G.; Verteramo, S. Total quality management and corporate social responsibility: A systematic review of the literature and implications of the COVID-19 pandemics. Total Qual. Manag. Bus. Excell. 2022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Grimaldi, M.; Corvello, V.; De Mauro, A.; Scarmozzino, E. A systematic literature review on intangible assets and open innovation. Knowl. Manag. Res. Pract. 2017, 15, 90–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Marshall, D.W. Food Choice and the Consumer; Springer Science & Business Media: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 1995. [Google Scholar]
- Ammirato, S.; Felicetti, A.M.; Ferrara, M.; Raso, C.; Violi, A. Collaborative organization models for sustainable development in the agri-food sector. Sustainability 2021, 13, 2301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zahoor, N.; Al-Tabbaa, O.; Khan, Z.; Wood, G. Collaboration and internationalization of SMEs: Insights and recommendations from a systematic review. Int. J. Manag. Rev. 2020, 22, 427–456. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Piccarozzi, M.; Aquilani, B.; Gatti, C. Industry 4.0 in management studies: A systematic literature review. Sustainability 2018, 10, 3821. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Christofi, M.; Vrontis, D.; Cadogan, J.W. Micro-foundational ambidexterity and multinational enterprises: A systematic review and a conceptual framework. Int. Bus. Rev. 2021, 30, 101625. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kuttschreuter, M.; Rutsaert, P.; Hilverda, F.; Regan, Á.; Barnett, J.; Verbeke, W. Seeking information about food-related risks: The contribution of social media. Food Qual. Prefer. 2014, 37, 10–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lioutas, E.D. Food Consumer Information Behavior: Need Arousal, Seeking Behavior, and Information Use. J. Agric. Food Inf. 2014, 15, 81–108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nocella, G.; Romano, D.; Stefani, G. Consumers’ attitudes, trust and willingness to pay for food information. Int. J. Consum. Stud. 2014, 38, 153–165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Paul, J.; Modi, A.; Patel, J. Predicting green product consumption using theory of planned behavior and reasoned action. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2016, 29, 123–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kumar, A.; Smith, S. Understanding local food consumers: Theory of planned behavior and segmentation approach. J. Food Prod. Mark. 2018, 24, 196–215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Qi, X.; Ploeger, A. Explaining consumers’ intentions towards purchasing green food in Qingdao, China: The amendment and extension of the theory of planned behavior. Appetite 2019, 133, 414–422. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lim, H.R.; An, S. Intention to purchase wellbeing food among Korean consumers: An application of the Theory of Planned Behavior. Food Qual. Prefer. 2021, 88, 104101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, T.; Grunert, K.G.; Zhou, Y. A values–beliefs–attitude model of local food consumption: An empirical study in China and Denmark. Food Qual. Prefer. 2020, 83, 103916. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zepeda, L.; Deal, D. Think before you eat: Photographic food diaries as intervention tools to change dietary decision making and attitudes. Int. J. Consum. Stud. 2008, 32, 692–698. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dhir, A.; Sadiq, M.; Talwar, S.; Sakashita, M.; Kaur, P. Why do retail consumers buy green apparel? A knowledge-attitude-behaviour-context perspective. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2021, 59, 102398. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zanoli, R.; Naspetti, S. Consumer motivations in the purchase of organic food: A means-end approach. Br. Food J. 2002, 104, 643–653. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Żakowska-Biemans, S. Polish consumer food choices and beliefs about organic food. Br. Food J. 2011, 113, 122–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nagy-Pércsi, K.; Fogarassy, C. Important influencing and decision factors in organic food purchasing in Hungary. Sustainability 2019, 11, 6075. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Paul, J.; Rana, J. Consumer behaviour and purchase intention for organic food. J. Consum. Mark. 2012, 29, 412–422. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rana, J.; Paul, J. Health motive and the purchase of organic food: A meta-analytic review. Int. J. Consum. Stud. 2020, 44, 162–171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Terpstra, T.; Zaalberg, R.; De Boer, J.; Botzen, W.J.W. You have been framed! How antecedents of information need mediate the effects of risk communication messages. Risk Anal. 2014, 34, 1506–1520. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Franco Lucas, B.; Costa, J.A.V.; Brunner, T.A. Superfoods: Drivers for Consumption. J. Food Prod. Mark. 2021, 27, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kher, S.V.; De Jonge, J.; Wentholt, M.T.; Deliza, R.; de Andrade, J.C.; Cnossen, H.J.; Frewer, L.J. Consumer perceptions of risks of chemical and microbiological contaminants associated with food chains: A cross-national study. Int. J. Consum. Stud. 2013, 37, 73–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Botonaki, A.; Natos, D.; Mattas, K. Exploring convenience food consumption through a structural equation model. J. Food Prod. Mark. 2008, 15, 64–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hjelmar, U. Consumers’ purchase of organic food products. A matter of convenience and reflexive practices. Appetite 2011, 56, 336–344. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Raimundo, L.M.B.; Batalha, M.O.; Sans, P. Consumer Attitudes Towards Convenience Food Usage: Exploring the Case of São Paulo, Brazil. J. Int. Food Agribus. Mark. 2020, 32, 403–424. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Scozzafava, G.; Corsi, A.M.; Casini, L.; Contini, C.; Loose, S.M. Using the animal to the last bit: Consumer preferences for different beef cuts. Appetite 2016, 96, 70–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Razzaque, M.A.; Chaudhry, S.N. Religiosity and Muslim consumers’ decision-making process in a non-Muslim society. J. Islam. Mark. 2013, 4, 198–217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Della Corte, V.; Del Gaudio, G.; Sepe, F. Ethical food and the kosher certification: A literature review. Br. Food J. 2018, 120, 2270–2288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Almli, V.L.; Verbeke, W.; Vanhonacker, F.; Næs, T.; Hersleth, M. General image and attribute perceptions of traditional food in six European countries. Food Qual. Prefer. 2011, 22, 129–138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pieniak, Z.; Verbeke, W.; Vanhonacker, F.; Guerrero, L.; Hersleth, M. Association between traditional food consumption and motives for food choice in six European countries. Appetite 2009, 53, 101–108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Contini, C.; Boncinelli, F.; Casini, L.; Pagnotta, G.; Romano, C.; Scozzafava, G. Why do we buy traditional foods? J. Food Prod. Mark. 2016, 22, 643–657. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Casini, L.; Boncinelli, F.; Contini, C.; Gerini, F.; Scozzafava, G.; Alfnes, F. Heterogeneous preferences with respect to food preparation time: Foodies and quickies. Food Qual. Prefer. 2019, 71, 233–241. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pickering, G.J.; Jain, A.K.; Bezawada, R. Super-tasting gastronomes? Taste phenotype characterization of foodies and wine experts. Food Qual. Prefer. 2013, 28, 85–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, Q.; Shen, Y.; Foster, T.; Hort, J. Measuring consumer emotional response and acceptance to sustainable food products. Food Res. Int. 2020, 131, 108992. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Mirosa, M.; Liu, Y.; Mirosa, R. Consumers’ behaviors and attitudes toward doggy bags: Identifying barriers and benefits to promoting behavior change. J. Food Prod. Mark. 2018, 24, 563–590. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Principato, L.; Secondi, L.; Pratesi, C.A. Reducing food waste: An investigation on the behaviour of Italian youths. Br. Food J. 2015, 117, 731–748. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vermeir, I.; Verbeke, W. Sustainable food consumption: Exploring the consumer “attitude–behavioral intention” gap. J. Agric. Environ. Ethics 2006, 19, 169–194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Borrello, M.; Annunziata, A.; Vecchio, R. Sustainability of palm oil: Drivers of consumers’ preferences. Sustainability 2019, 11, 4818. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Muth, M.K.; Karns, S.A.; Zmuda, M.; Coglaiti, M.C. Price, nutrition, time, and other trade-offs: A Web-based food value analysis application to compare foods at different levels of preparation and processing. Nutr. Today 2014, 49, 176–184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Zander, K.; Hamm, U. Information search behaviour and its determinants: The case of ethical attributes of organic food. Int. J. Consum. Stud. 2012, 36, 307–316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wendel, S.; Dellaert, B.G. Situation variation in consumers’ media channel consideration. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 2005, 33, 575. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Kim, Y.G.; Woo, E. Consumer acceptance of a quick response (QR) code for the food traceability system: Application of an extended technology acceptance model (TAM). Food Res. Int. 2016, 85, 266–272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vermeir, I.; Verbeke, W. Sustainable food consumption among young adults in Belgium: Theory of planned behaviour and the role of confidence and values. Ecol. Econ. 2008, 64, 542–553. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rutsaert, P.; Pieniak, Z.; Regan, Á.; McConnon, Á.; Verbeke, W. Consumer interest in receiving information through social media about the risks of pesticide residues. Food Control. 2013, 34, 386–392. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bialkova, S.; Grunert, K.G.; van Trijp, H. Standing out in the crowd: The effect of information clutter on consumer attention for front-of-pack nutrition labels. Food Policy 2014, 41, 65–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kamal, N.; Fels, S.; Fergusson, M. Online social networks for health behaviour change: Designing to increase socialization. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2014, 41, 444–453. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sfodera, F.; Mattiacci, A.; Nosi, C.; Mingo, I. Social networks feed the food supplements shadow market. Br. Food J. 2020, 122, 1531–1548. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Reichelt, J.; Sievert, J.; Jacob, F. How credibility affects eWOM reading: The influences of expertise, trustworthiness, and similarity on utilitarian and social functions. J. Mark. Commun. 2014, 20, 65–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, R.; Pieniak, Z.; Verbeke, W. Food-related hazards in China: Consumers’ perceptions of risk and trust in information sources. Food Control. 2014, 46, 291–298. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Rosati, S.; Saba, A. The perception of risks associated with food-related hazards and the perceived reliability of sources of information. Int. J. Food Sci. Technol. 2004, 39, 491–500. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hussain, S.; Ahmed, W.; Jafar, R.M.S.; Rabnawaz, A.; Jianzhou, Y. eWOM source credibility, perceived risk and food product customer’s information adoption. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2017, 66, 96–102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Botonaki, A.; Polymeros, K.; Tsakiridou, E.; Mattas, K. The role of food quality certification on consumers’ food choices. Br. Food J. 2006, 108, 77–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Onozaka, Y.; Melbye, E.L.; Skuland, A.V.; Hansen, H. Consumer intentions to buy front-of-pack nutrition labeled food products: The moderating effects of personality differences. J. Food Prod. Mark. 2014, 20, 390–407. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Choi, J.; Choi, A. Perceptions of food labelling about allergens in food products in South Korea. Br. Food J. 2016, 118, 2842–2854. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aagerup, U.; Frank, A.-S.; Hultqvist, E. The persuasive effects of emotional green packaging claims. Br. Food J. 2019, 121, 3233–3246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Samoggia, A.; Bertazzoli, A.; Ruggeri, A. Food retailing marketing management: Social media communication for healthy food. Int. J. Retail. Distrib. Manag. 2019, 47, 928–956. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ragelienė, T.; Grønhøj, A. The role of peers, siblings and social media for children’s healthy eating socialization: A mixed methods study. Food Qual. Prefer. 2021, 93, 104255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Drichoutis, A.C.; Lazaridis, P.; Nayga, R.M.; Kapsokefalou, M.; Chryssochoidis, G. A theoretical and empirical investigation of nutritional label use. Eur. J. Health Econ. 2008, 9, 293–304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Grunert, K.G.; Hieke, S.; Wills, J. Sustainability labels on food products: Consumer motivation, understanding and use. Food Policy 2014, 44, 177–189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Rodrigues, J.F.; Pereira, R.C.; Silva, A.A.; Mendes, A.O.; Carneiro, J.D.D.S. Sodium content in foods: Brazilian consumers’ opinions, subjective knowledge and purchase intent. Int. J. Consum. Stud. 2017, 41, 735–744. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Asioli, D.; Aschemann-Witzel, J.; Caputo, V.; Vecchio, R.; Annunziata, A.; Næs, T.; Varela, P. Making sense of the “clean label” trends: A review of consumer food choice behavior and discussion of industry implications. Food Res. Int. 2017, 99, 58–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Rimal, A.P.; Moon, W.; Balasubramanian, S. Agro-biotechnology and organic food purchase in the United Kingdom. Br. Food J. 2005, 107, 84–97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ma, Y.J.; Lee, H.H. Understanding consumption behaviours for fair trade non-food products: Focusing on self-transcendence and openness to change values. Int. J. Consum. Stud. 2012, 36, 622–634. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Stern, T.; Haas, R.; Meixner, O. Consumer acceptance of wood-based food additives. Br. Food J. 2009, 111, 179–195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Saulais, L.; Doyon, M.; Ruffieux, B.; Kaiser, H. Consumer knowledge about dietary fats: Another French paradox? Br. Food J. 2012, 114, 108–120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Richter, B. Knowledge and perception of food waste among German consumers. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 166, 641–648. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Edenbrandt, A.K.; Lagerkvist, C.J.; Nordström, J. Interested, indifferent or active information avoiders of carbon labels: Cognitive dissonance and ascription of responsibility as motivating factors. Food Policy 2021, 101, 102036. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Van Der Merwe, D.; Kempen, E.L.; Breedt, S.; De Beer, H. Food choice: Student consumers’ decision-making process regarding food products with limited label information. Int. J. Consum. Stud. 2010, 34, 11–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Akram, U.; Ansari, A.R.; Fu, G.; Junaid, M. Feeling hungry? let’s order through mobile! examining the fast food mobile commerce in China. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2020, 56, 102142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wu, X.; Xiong, J.; Yan, J.; Wang, Y. Perceived quality of traceability information and its effect on purchase intention towards organic food. J. Mark. Manag. 2021, 37, 1267–1286. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aday, M.S.; Yener, U. Assessing consumers’ adoption of active and intelligent packaging. Br. Food J. 2015, 117, 157–177. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tanner, S.A.; McCarthy, M.B.; O’Reilly, S.J. Digital labelling in the retail environment: A domain-specific innovativeness perspective. Int. J. Retail. Distrib. Manag. 2019, 47, 1336–1352. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kukar-Kinney, M.; Xia, L. The effectiveness of number of deals purchased in influencing consumers’ response to daily deal promotions: A cue utilization approach. J. Bus. Res. 2017, 79, 189–197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Visentin, M.; Tuan, A. Book belly band as a visual cue: Assessing its impact on consumers’ in-store responses. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2021, 59, 102359. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, G.; Xia, W. Organizational size and IT innovation adoption: A meta-analysis. Inf. Manag. 2006, 43, 975–985. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Eisenhardt, K.M. Agency theory: An assessment and review. Acad. Manag. Rev. 1989, 14, 57–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dimoka, A.; Hong, Y.; Pavlou, P.A. On product uncertainty in online markets: Theory and evidence. MIS Q. 2012, 36, 395–426. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Golan, E.; Kuchler, F.; Mitchell, L.; Greene, C.; Jessup, A. Economics of food labeling. J. Consum. Policy 2001, 24, 117–184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McCluskey, J.J. A game theoretic approach to organic foods: An analysis of asymmetric information and policy. Agric. Resour. Econ. Rev. 2000, 29, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Hobbs, J.E. Information asymmetry and the role of traceability systems. Agribus. Int. J. 2004, 20, 397–415. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hobbs, J.E.; Kerr, W.A. Consumer information, labelling and international trade in agri-food products. Food Policy 2006, 31, 78–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Badia-Melis, R.; Mishra, P.; Ruiz-García, L. Food traceability: New trends and recent advances. A review. Food Control. 2015, 57, 393–401. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Atzori, L.; Iera, A.; Morabito, G.; Nitti, M. The social internet of things (siot)–when social networks meet the internet of things: Concept, architecture and network characterization. Comput. Netw. 2012, 56, 3594–3608. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Volpentesta, A.P.; Felicetti, A.M.; Ammirato, S. Intelligent Food Information Provision to Consumers in an Internet of Food Era. In Proceedings of the 18th Working Conference on Virtual Enterprises, Vicenza, Italy, September 18–20 2017; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2017; pp. 725–736. [Google Scholar]
- Behnke, K.; Janssen, M.F.W.H.A. Boundary conditions for traceability in food supply chains using blockchain technology. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2020, 52, 101969. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kouhizadeh, M.; Saberi, S.; Sarkis, J. Blockchain technology and the sustainable supply chain: Theoretically exploring adoption barriers. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2021, 231, 107831. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nosratabadi, S.; Mosavi, A.; Lakner, Z. Food supply chain and business model innovation. Foods 2020, 9, 132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Zott, C.; Amit, R. Business Model Innovation: How to Create Value in a Digital World’. NIM Mark. Intell. Rev. 2017, 9, 19–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Cosenz, F.; Bivona, E. Fostering growth patterns of SMEs through business model innovation. A tailored dynamic business modelling approach. J. Bus. Res. 2021, 130, 658–669. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Venkatesh, V.; Morris, M.G.; Davis, G.B.; Davis, F.D. User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Q. 2003, 27, 425–478. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Chuttur, M.Y. Overview of the technology acceptance model: Origins, developments and future directions. Work. Pap. Inf. Syst. 2009, 9, 9–37. [Google Scholar]
- Oh, J.C.; Yoon, S.J. Predicting the use of online information services based on a modified UTAUT model. Behav. Inf. Technol. 2014, 33, 716–729. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, W.S.; Song, M.; Moon, J.; Tang, R. Application of the technology acceptance model to food delivery apps. Br. Food J. 2023, 125, 49–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, Y.P.; Tsai, H.Y.; Ruangkanjanases, A. The determinants for food safety push notifications on continuance intention in an e-appointment system for public health medical services: The perspectives of utaut and information system quality. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 8287. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Bovee, M.; Srivastava, R.P.; Mak, B. A conceptual framework and belief-function approach to assessing overall information quality. Int. J. Intell. Syst. 2003, 18, 51–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Nelson, R.R.; Todd, P.A.; Wixom, B.H. Antecedents of information and system quality: An empirical examination within the context of data warehousing. J. Manag. Inf. Syst. 2005, 21, 199–235. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nicolaou, A.I.; McKnight, D.H. Perceived information quality in data exchanges: Effects on risk, trust, and intention to use. Inf. Syst. Res. 2006, 17, 332–335l. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Borek, A.; Parlikad, A.K.; Woodall, P.; Tomasella, M. A risk based model for quantifying the impact of information quality. Comput. Ind. 2014, 65, 354–366. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Eppler, M.J.; Helfert, M.; Gasser, U. Information quality: Organizational, technological, and legal perspectives. Stud. Commun. Sci. 2004, 4, 1–16. [Google Scholar]
- Shankaranarayanan, G.; Cai, Y. Supporting data quality management in decision-making. Decis. Support Syst. 2006, 42, 302–317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kwon, O.; Lee, N.; Shin, B. Data quality management, data usage experience and acquisition intention of big data analytics. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2014, 34, 387–394. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Smith, S.M.; Roster, C.A.; Golden, L.L.; Albaum, G.S. A multi-group analysis of online survey respondent data quality: Comparing a regular USA consumer panel to MTurk samples. J. Bus. Res. 2016, 69, 3139–3148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nofal, A.M.; Nicolaou, N.; Symeonidou, N.; Shane, S. Biology and management: A review, critique, and research agenda. J. Manag. 2018, 44, 7–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
Journal | No. Papers |
---|---|
British Food Journal | 28 |
International Journal of Consumer Studies | 13 |
Journal of Food Products Marketing | 8 |
Food Quality and Preference | 6 |
Appetite | 5 |
International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management | 4 |
Journal of Cleaner Production | 4 |
Sustainability | 4 |
Food Policy | 4 |
Ecological Economics | 3 |
Food Control | 3 |
Food Research International | 3 |
Journal of Consumer Marketing | 3 |
Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services | 3 |
Computers in Human Behavior | 2 |
Journal of Islamic Marketing | 2 |
International Journal of food science & technology | 1 |
Journal of Agricultural and Environmental ethics | 1 |
Journal of International Food & Agribusiness Marketing | 1 |
Journal of Marketing Communications | 1 |
Journal of Marketing Management | 1 |
Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science | 1 |
Psychology and Marketing | 1 |
Risk Analysis | 1 |
The European Journal of Health Economics | 1 |
Trends in Food Science and Technology | 1 |
Main Research Themes in the Literature | Emerging Research Direction | Theoretical Domain | Research Question |
---|---|---|---|
The role of consumers’ attitudes and motivations in stimulating information need | The role of food information in assessing food consumption experiences | Cue utilization theory | How can food information influence consumers’ evaluation of a consumption experience? |
Features of information channels for food information seeking | Intelligent food services for information asymmetry reduction and consumer empowerment | Principal-agent theory | Could intelligent food services contribute to reducing information asymmetries, empowering consumers in their food consumption activities? How do intelligent food services impact consumers’ perceptions of food information concerning traditional information services? |
Features of information channels for food information seeking | Business model innovation in the food information provision market | Business model innovation | Which are the stakeholders in food supply chains interested in providing food information services? What is the value proposition they release? What value do these services have for the business of each stakeholder (which value is captured)? What is the role of consumers in the food information provision ecosystem? |
Consumer behaviour in food information contextualization and use | Consumers’ readiness towards emerging food information services | Innovation adoption and technology acceptance | Are food consumers ready to use and accept intelligent food services? |
Consumer behaviour in food information contextualization and use | A model framework of consumer perceived information value of food marketing communications | Perceived information value | Which characteristics of food information services impact consumers’ value perception of food information? Is there a relationship between consumer characteristics and the relevance of some categories of food information?” |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Felicetti, A.M.; Volpentesta, A.P.; Linzalone, R.; Ammirato, S. Information Behaviour of Food Consumers: A Systematic Literature Review and a Future Research Agenda. Sustainability 2023, 15, 3758. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15043758
Felicetti AM, Volpentesta AP, Linzalone R, Ammirato S. Information Behaviour of Food Consumers: A Systematic Literature Review and a Future Research Agenda. Sustainability. 2023; 15(4):3758. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15043758
Chicago/Turabian StyleFelicetti, Alberto Michele, Antonio Palmiro Volpentesta, Roberto Linzalone, and Salvatore Ammirato. 2023. "Information Behaviour of Food Consumers: A Systematic Literature Review and a Future Research Agenda" Sustainability 15, no. 4: 3758. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15043758
APA StyleFelicetti, A. M., Volpentesta, A. P., Linzalone, R., & Ammirato, S. (2023). Information Behaviour of Food Consumers: A Systematic Literature Review and a Future Research Agenda. Sustainability, 15(4), 3758. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15043758