Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.5851/kosfa.2021.e67

The Effect of Korean Native Chicken Breed Information on Consumer Sensory Evaluation and Purchase Behavior  

Park, Seoyoung (Department of Agricultural Economics & Rural Development, Seoul National University)
Kim, Nayeong (Department of Agricultural Economics & Rural Development, Seoul National University)
Kim, Wooksung (Department of Agricultural Economics & Rural Development, Seoul National University)
Moon, Junghoon (Research Institute of Agriculture and Life Sciences, Seoul National University)
Publication Information
Food Science of Animal Resources / v.42, no.1, 2022 , pp. 111-127 More about this Journal
Abstract
This study examined how chicken breed affects consumer behavior. The breeds evaluated were a Korean native chicken (KNC) and a commercial broiler (CB). Consumer behavior was measured by evaluating sensory attributes (taste, odor, and texture) and purchase behaviors [satisfaction, purchase intention, and willingness to pay (WTP)]. The sensory evaluation was conducted using healthy Korean consumers (n=100). The chicken was cooked in baeksuk (Korean traditional chicken soup), which is a seasonal summer health food in Korea. The participants evaluated sensory attributes and purchase behaviors between blinded samples of baeksuk (CB) and unblinded samples of baeksuk (KNC). The sensory evaluation involved chicken breasts and legs. The participants considered KNC as having a more umami taste, a chewier and juicer texture, and a less metallic odor than CB. Moreover, when participants were given KNC breed information, they expressed higher satisfaction, purchase intention, and WTP. The results of this study contribute to consumer behavior literature by revealing the effects of breed information on consumer sensory perceptions and purchase behaviors. Furthermore, the findings provide evidence that branding KNC is one way to increase its demand and low market share while contributing to sustainable consumption.
Keywords
Korean native chicken; consumer behavior; sensory evaluation; information effect; sustainable consumption;
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 11  (Citation Analysis)
연도 인용수 순위
1 Luning PA, Marcelis WJ, Jongen WMF. 2002. Food quality management: A techno-managerial approach. Wageningen Academic Publishers, Wageningen, Netherlands. p 323.
2 Torquati B, Tempesta T, Vecchiato D, Venanzi S. 2018. Tasty or sustainable? The effect of product sensory experience on a sustainable new food product: An application of discrete choice experiments on chianina tinned beef. Sustainability 10:2795.   DOI
3 Yoo IJ, Jeon KH, Park WM, Choi SY. 1998. Effect of heating conditions and additives on bone crumble and shelf-life of retorted Samgyetang. Korean J Food Sci Anim Resour 19:19-26.
4 Rural Development Administration. Chicken consumption and perception report. Available from: https://www.rda.go.kr:2360/board/board.do?mode=view&prgId=day_farmprmninfoEntry&dataNo=100000767193. Accessed at Jul 20, 2021.
5 Nakamura Y, Goto TK, Tokumori K, Yoshiura T, Kobayashi K, Nakamura Y, Honda H, Ninomiya Y, Yoshiura K. 2011. Localization of brain activation by umami taste in humans. Brain Res 1406:18-29.   DOI
6 Nam KC. 2017. Development of new chicken breeds to diversify consumer market. Livest Food Sci Ind 6:17-23.
7 Nam KC. 2019. The age of chicken breed recognition. Livest Food Sci Ind 8:48-54.
8 Nelson P. 1970. Information and consumer behavior. J Polit Econ 78:311-329.   DOI
9 Jung S, Jo K, Lee S, Choi Y. 2019. Effect of ultrasound treatment on the quality properties of chicken breast meat and the broth from Korean chicken soup (baeksuk). Korean J Agric Sci 46:539-548.   DOI
10 Johnson PB, Civille GV. 1986. A standardized lexicon of meat WOF descriptors. J Sens Stud 1:99-104.   DOI
11 Bernues A, Olaizola A, Corcoran K. 2003. Labelling information demanded by European consumers and relationships with purchasing motives, quality and safety of meat. Meat Sci 65:1095-1106.   DOI
12 Kim HJ, Yun HJ, Lee JH, Heo KN, Kang BS, Jo CU. 2012. Optimization of process condition of boiled Korean native chicken by response surface methodology. Korean J Agric Sci 39:195-202.   DOI
13 Lawless HT, Heymann H. 2010. Sensory evaluation of food: Principles and practices. 2nd ed. Springer, New York, NY, USA. p 619.
14 Leong J, Kasamatsu C, Ong E, Hoi JT, Loong MN. 2016. A study on sensory properties of sodium reduction and replacement in Asian food using difference-from-control test. Food Sci Nutr 4:469-478.   DOI
15 Ahn DH, Park SY. 2002. Studies on components related to taste such as free amino acids and nucleotides in Korean native chicken meat. J Korean Soc Food Sci Nutr 31:547-552.   DOI
16 Altieri MA. 1999. The ecological role of biodiversity in agroecosystems. Agric Ecosyst Environ 74:19-31.   DOI
17 Cha J, Park B, Park M, Kang H, Kim Y, Kim C, Heo K, Choo H, Kang B. 2017. Inbreeding levels and pedigree structure of Korean indigenous chicken population. Korean J Poult Sci 44:83-92.   DOI
18 Jung S, Bae YS, Kim HJ, Jayasena DD, Lee JH, Park HB, Heo KN, Jo C. 2013. Carnosine, anserine, creatine, and inosine 5'-monophosphate contents in breast and thigh meats from 5 lines of Korean native chicken. Poult Sci 92:3275-3282.   DOI
19 Han JS, Han KP, Kim JS, Kim MH. 1996. A study for the mechanical and sensory characteristics of chickens by cooking methods: For the focus on native chicken. J East Asian Soc Diet Life 6:307-316.
20 Choi SH, Moon JH. 2021. Effects of regional information on consumers' sensory evaluation and purchasing behavior of processed foods: For mandarin liquor. Foodserv Manage Soc Korea 24:345-372.   DOI
21 de-Magistris T, Gracia A. 2016. Consumers' willingness-to-pay for sustainable food products: The case of organically and locally grown almonds in Spain. J Clean Prod 118:97-104.   DOI
22 Perrin L, Symoneaux R, Maitre I, Asselin C, Jourjon F, Pages J. 2008. Comparison of three sensory methods for use with the napping® procedure: Case of ten wines from Loire valley. Food Qual Prefer 19:1-11.   DOI
23 Risvik E, McEwan JA, Colwill JS, Rogers R, Lyon DH. 1994. Projective mapping: A tool for sensory analysis and consumer research. Food Qual Prefer 5:263-269.   DOI
24 Seo S, Ahn HK, Jeong J, Moon J. 2016. Consumers' attitude toward sustainable food products: Ingredients vs. packaging. Sustainability 8:1073.   DOI
25 Cha JS, Kim SH, Jung S, Kang HJ, Jo C, Nam KC. 2014. Comparison of meat quality and sensory characteristics of different native chickens in Korean market. Korean J Poult Sci 41:53-59.   DOI
26 Choe JH, Nam KC, Jung S, Kim BN, Yun HJ, Jo CR. 2010. Differences in the quality characteristics between commercial Korean native chickens and broilers. Korean J Food Sci Anim Resour 30:13-19.   DOI
27 Torrico DD, Jirangrat W, Wang J, Chompreeda P, Sriwattana S, Prinyawiwatkul W. 2018. Novel modelling approaches to characterize and quantify carryover effects on sensory acceptability. Foods 7:186.   DOI
28 Cardello AV. 1994. Consumer expectations and their role in food acceptance. In Measurement of food preferences. MacFie HJH, Thomson DMH (ed). Springer, Boston, MA, USA. pp 253-297.
29 Murphy JM. 1992. What is branding? In Branding: A key marketing tool. Murphy JM (ed). Palgrave Macmillan, London, UK. p 5.
30 Thompson JM, Pleasants AB, Pethick DW. 2005. The effect of design and demographic factors on consumer sensory scores. Aust J Exp Agric 45:477-482.   DOI
31 Wilde LL. 1980. The economics of consumer information acquisition. J Bus 53:S143-S158.   DOI
32 Zanoli R, Scarpa R, Napolitano F, Piasentier E, Naspetti S, Bruschi V. 2013. Organic label as an identifier of environmentally related quality: A consumer choice experiment on beef in Italy. Renew Agric Food Syst 28:70-79.   DOI
33 Zhang Y, Venkitasamy C, Pan Z, Liu W, Zhao L. 2017. Novel umami ingredients: Umami peptides and their taste. J Food Sci 82:16-23.   DOI
34 Cerjak M, Karolyi D, Kovacic D. 2011. Effect of information about pig breed on consumers' acceptability of dry sausage. J Sens Stud 26:128-134.   DOI
35 Macfie HJ, Bratchell N, Greenhoff K, Vallis LV. 1989. Designs to balance the effect of order of presentation and first-order carry-over effects in hall tests. J Sens Stud 4:129-148.   DOI
36 Meilgaard MC, Carr BT, Civille GV. 1999. Sensory evaluation techniques. 3rd ed. CRC Press, New York, NY, USA. p 464.
37 O'Reilly RA, Pannier L, Gardner GE, Garmyn AJ, Luo H, Meng Q, Miller MF, Pethick DW. 2020. Influence of demographic factors on sheepmeat sensory scores of American, Australian and Chinese consumers. Foods 9:529.   DOI
38 OECD-FAO. OECD-FAO agricultural outlook 2021-2030. Available from: https://www.oecd-library.org/content/publication/19428846-en. Accessed at Jul 19, 2021.
39 Oliver P, Cicerale S, Pang E, Keast R. 2018. Comparison of quantitative descriptive analysis to the napping methodology with and without product training. J Sens Stud 33:e12331.   DOI
40 Ball RD. 1997. Incomplete block designs for the minimisation of order and carry-over effects in sensory analysis. Food Qual Prefer 8:111-118.   DOI
41 Chakraborty SK, Kumbhar BK, Chakraborty S, Yadav P. 2011. Influence of processing parameters on textural characteristics and overall acceptability of millet enriched biscuits using response surface methodology. J Food Sci Technol 48:167-174.   DOI
42 Christensen CM. 1983. Effects of color on aroma, flavor and texture judgments of foods. J Food Sci 48:787-790.   DOI
43 Dodds WB, Monroe KB, Grewal D. 1991. Effects of price, brand, and store information on buyers' product evaluations. J Mark Res 28:307-319.   DOI
44 Han P, Mohebbi M, Unrath M, Hummel C, Hummel T. 2018. Different neural processing of umami and salty taste determined by umami identification ability independent of repeated umami exposure. Neuroscience 383:74-83.   DOI
45 Hoffmann I. 2011. Livestock biodiversity and sustainability. Livest Sci 139:69-79.   DOI
46 Lee SY, Park JY, Hyun JM, Jung S, Jo C, Nam KC. 2018. Comparative analysis of meat quality traits of new strains of native chickens for samgyetang. Korean J Poult Sci 45:175-182.   DOI
47 Korea Animal and Plant Quarantine Agency. Annual report of slaughter animals. Available from: http://www.qia.go.kr/livestock/clean/viewTcsjWebAction.do?id=183540. Accessed at Jul 19, 2021.
48 Kruk ZA, Yun H, Rutley DL, Lee EJ, Kim YJ, Jo C. 2011. The effect of high pressure on microbial population, meat quality and sensory characteristics of chicken breast fillet. Food Control 22:6-12.   DOI
49 Lee KH, Kim HJ, Lee HJ, Kang MG, Jo CR. 2012. A study on components related to flavor and taste in commercial broiler and Korean native chicken meat. Korean J Food Preserv 19:385-392.   DOI
50 Liu Y, Lyon BG, Windham WR, Lyon CE, Savage EM. 2004. Principal component analysis of physical, color, and sensory characteristics of chicken breasts deboned at two, four, six, and twenty-four hours postmortem. Poult Sci 83:101-108.   DOI
51 Park S, Kim N, Choi S, Moon J. 2020. The consumption patterns of Korean native chicken. Korean J Poult Sci 47:247-254.   DOI
52 Oude Ophuis PAM, Van Trijp HCM. 1995. Perceived quality: A market driven and consumer oriented approach. Food Qual Prefer 6:177-183.   DOI
53 Overberg J, Hummel T, Krude H, Wiegand S. 2012. Differences in taste sensitivity between obese and non-obese children and adolescents. Arch Dis Child 97:1048-1052.   DOI
54 Park MN, Hong EC, Kang BS, Kim HK, Kim JH, Na SH, Chae HS, Seo OS, Han JY, Jeong JH, HwangBo J. 2010. Chemical composition and meat quality of crossbred Korean native chickens (KNC). Korean J Poult Sci 37:415-421.   DOI
55 Seo D, Lee JH. 2016. DNA markers for the genetic diversity in Korean native chicken breeds: A review. Korean J Poult Sci 43:63-76.   DOI
56 Sow TMA, Grongnet JF. 2010. Sensory characteristics and consumer preference for chicken meat in Guinea. Poult Sci 89:2281-2292.   DOI
57 Steenkamp JBEM. 1990. Conceptual model of the quality perception process. J Bus Res 21:309-333.   DOI
58 Nestrud MA, Lawless HT. 2011. Recovery of subsampled dimensions and configurations derived from napping data by MFA and MDS. Atten Percept Psychophys 73:1266-1278.   DOI
59 Escobedo Del Bosque CI, Altmann BA, Ciulu M, Halle I, Jansen S, Nolte T, Weigend S, Morlein D. 2020. Meat quality parameters and sensory properties of one high-performing and two local chicken breeds fed with vicia faba. Foods 9:1052.   DOI
60 Deliza R, MacFie HJ. 1996. The generation of sensory expectation by external cues and its effect on sensory perception and hedonic ratings: A review. J Sens Stud 11:103-128.   DOI
61 Fernqvist F, Ekelund L. 2014. Credence and the effect on consumer liking of food: A review. Food Qual Prefer 32:340-353.   DOI
62 Jang YS, Lee H. 1988. Study on rheological characterization and chemical composition by cooking method of yeongebacksuk (Korean traditional cooked chicken). Korean J Food Cook Sci 4:31-38.
63 Handon Association. Indroduce of Handon association. Available from: https://porkboard.han-don.com. Accessed at Sep 28, 2021.
64 Hanwoo Association. Introduce of Hanwoo association. Available from: http://www.ihanwoo.org. Accessed at Sep 28, 2021.
65 Hwang J, Lee S, Jo M, Cho W, Moon J. 2021. The effect of sustainability-related information on the sensory evaluation and purchase behavior towards salami products. Food Sci Anim Resour 41:95-109.   DOI
66 Jin S, Jayasena DD, Jo C, Lee JH. 2017. The breeding history and commercial development of the Korean native chicken. Worlds Poult Sci J 73:163-174.   DOI
67 Juhl HJ, Kristensen K, Ostergaard P. 2002. Customer satisfaction in European food retailing. J Retail Consum Serv 9:327-334.   DOI
68 Kang BS, Hong EC, Kim HK, Kim CD, Heo KN, Choo HJ, Suh OS, Hwangbo J. 2011. Productivity and performance test of egg-type commercial Korean native chickens. Korean J Poult Sci 38:331-338.   DOI
69 Kim HC, Choe J, Nam KC, Jung S, Jo C. 2018. Productivity and meat quality of the new crossbred Korean native chickens compared with commercial breeds. Korean J Poult Sci 45:125-135.   DOI
70 Han K. 2018. Mechanical and sensory properties of chicken according to the cooking method. 2018 The East Asian Society of Dietary Life Conference, Seoul, Korea. p 171.
71 Jayasena DD, Kim SH, Lee HJ, Jung S, Lee JH, Park HB, Jo C. 2014. Comparison of the amounts of taste-related compounds in raw and cooked meats from broilers and Korean native chickens. Poult Sci 93:3163-3170.   DOI
72 Ferris SJ, Kempton RA, Muir DD. 2003. Carryover in sensory trials. Food Qual Prefer 14:299-304.   DOI
73 Jayasena DD, Jung S, Kim HJ, Bae YS, Yong HI, Lee JH, Kim JG, Jo C. 2013. Comparison of quality traits of meat from Korean native chickens and broilers used in two different traditional Korean cuisines. Asian-Australas J Anim Sci 26:1038-1046.   DOI