Consumer Acceptance of Dry Dog Food Variations

Article, Other literature type English OPEN
Donfrancesco, Brizio Di ; Koppel, Kadri ; Swaney-Stueve, Marianne ; Chambers, Edgar (2014)
  • Publisher: MDPI
  • Journal: Animals : an Open Access Journal from MDPI, volume 4, issue 2, pages 313-330 (issn: 2076-2615, eissn: 2076-2615)
  • Related identifiers: pmc: PMC4494379, doi: 10.3390/ani4020313
  • Subject: liking | pet food | appearance | QL1-991 | Veterinary medicine | SF600-1100 | dog | aroma | consumer | Zoology | Article

Simple Summary The objectives of this study were to compare the acceptance of different dry dog food products by consumers, determine consumer clusters for acceptance, and identify the characteristics of dog food that drive consumer acceptance. Pet owners evaluated dry dog food samples available in the US market. The results indicated that appearance of the sample, especially the color, influenced pet owner’s overall liking more than the aroma of the product. Abstract The objectives of this study were to compare the acceptance of different dry dog food products by consumers, determine consumer clusters for acceptance, and identify the characteristics of dog food that drive consumer acceptance. Eight dry dog food samples available in the US market were evaluated by pet owners. In this study, consumers evaluated overall liking, aroma, and appearance liking of the products. Consumers were also asked to predict their purchase intent, their dog’s liking, and cost of the samples. The results indicated that appearance of the sample, especially the color, influenced pet owner’s overall liking more than the aroma of the product. Overall liking clusters were not related to income, age, gender, or education, indicating that general consumer demographics do not appear to play a main role in individual consumer acceptance of dog food products.
  • References (22)
    22 references, page 1 of 3

    Taylor, J. Market Update: The Premium Petfood Shopper Survives. Petfood Industry, May 2013.

    Available online: http://www.petfoodindustry.com/Market_update__The_premium_petfood_ shopper_survives.html (accessed on 11 April 2014).

    Phillips-Donaldson, D. Humanization Still Driving Petfood Industry Growth. Petfood Industry, November 2011. Available online: http://www.petfoodindustry.com/Default.aspx?pageid=5306& id=8131&terms=dog+food (accessed on 11 April 2014).

    Stud. 2013, 28, 57-65.

    Cuellar, S.S.; Claps, M. Differential effects of brand, ratings and region on willingness to pay: A hedonic approach. J. Wine Res. 2013, 24, 138-155.

    Koppel, K. Sensory Analysis of pet foods. J. Sci. Food Agr. 2014, doi:10.1002/jsfa.6597.

    Lin, S.; Hsieh, F.; Heymann, H.; Huff, H.E. Effects of lipids and processing conditions on the sensory characteristics of extruded dry pet food. J. Food Qual. 1998, 21, 265-284.

    Pickering, G.J. Optimisation of dried cat food using a human taste panel: Methodology and characterization of flavor. Food Aust. 2009, 61, 30-36.

    Pickering, G.J. Optimizing the sensory characteristics and acceptance of canned cat food: Use of a human taste panel. J. Anim. Physiol. Anim. Nutr. 2009, 93, 52-60.

    Di Donfrancesco, B.; Koppel, K.; Chambers, E., IV. An initial lexicon for sensory properties of dry dog food. J. Sens. Stud. 2012, 27, 498-510.

  • Metrics
    No metrics available
Share - Bookmark