1700846196
1700846197
13.当国家大豆研究中心启动这些早期大豆研发项目时,这些研究的资金支持也来自农业研究委员会、伊利诺斯大豆计划工作委员会及伊利诺斯大豆食品研究中心。
1700846198
1700846199
14.俄罗斯人遇到的问题不同。在俄罗斯,“大豆”一词听起来像一个众所周知的核弹系统的缩略语。回顾关于此类联想的研究见:Brian Wansink,Marketing Nutrition:Soy,Functional Foods,Biotechnology,and Obesity (Champaign:University of Illinois Press,2005);Brian Wansink and Randall Westgren,“Profiling Taste-Motivated Segments,” Appetite 4:3 (December 2003):323–27;Brian Wansink,“Overcoming the Taste Stigma of Soy,” Journal of Food Science 68:8 (September 2003):2604–2606。
1700846200
1700846201
15.然而,这并不适用于所有人。养生派人群就不受大豆标签的影响。也就是说,标签上写有“大豆”,对他们的期望值既无贬损,也无提高。更多内容请见:Brian Wansink and Se-Bum Park,“Sensory Suggestiveness and Labeling:Do Soy Labels Bias Taste?” Journal of Sensory Studies 17:5 (November 2002):483–91。
1700846202
1700846203
7. 想吃惬意美食
1700846204
1700846205
1.参见:Brian Wansink,Matthew M. Cheney,and Nina Chan,“Exploring Comfort Food Preferences Across Gender and Age,” Physiology and Behavior 79:4 (2003):739–747。
1700846206
1700846207
2.目前,探讨这种“坏心情吃坏食物、好心情吃好食物”的基本规律的论文包括:Brian Wansink,Matthew M. Cheney,and Nina Chan,“Exploring Comfort Food Preferences Across Gender and Age,” Physiology and Behavior 79:4 (2003):739–47。
1700846208
1700846209
3.有两篇论文利用可控实验室研究探讨了这一现象背后的一般理论:Nitika Garg,Brian Wansink,and J. Jeffrey Inman,“The Influence of Incidental Affect on Consumer’s Food Intake” (2007),Journal of Marketing;Brian Wansink,Meryl P. Gardner,Junyong Kim,and Se-Bum Park,“Comfort Food,Mood,and Intake” 。
1700846210
1700846211
4.关于阶梯法的最初介绍见于:Thomas J. Reynolds and Jonathan Gutman,“Laddering Theory,Method,Analysis,and Interpretation,” Journal of Advertising Research (February/March 1988):11– 31。此后,阶梯法得到了调整,以更好地适应不同情况,比如食品或高端品牌,见:Brian Wansink,“Using Laddering to Understand and Leverage a Brand’s Equity,” Qualitative Market Research 6:2 (2003):111–18。另见:Brian Wansink,“New Techniques to Generate Key Marketing Insights,” Marketing Research (Summer 2000):28–36。
1700846212
1700846213
5.食物认同感的话题颇有趣味性,研究方法各有不同。最新的研究包括:Carol Bisogni,Mark Connors,Carol M. Devine,and Jeffrey Sobal,“Who We Are and How We Eat:A Qualitative Study of Identities in Food Choice,” Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior 34:3 (May–June 2002):128–139;Michael W. Lynn and Judy Harris,“Individual Differences in the Pursuit of Uniqueness Through Consumption,” Journal of Applied Social Psychology 27 (1997):1861–1883。
1700846214
1700846215
6.这个项目的主要目的是建立一种新的统计方法。关于汤品的预测只是一种测试方法。见:Brian Wansink and SeaBum Park,“Accounting for Taste:Prototypes that Predict Preference,” Journal of Database Marketing,7:4,(2000),308–20。
1700846216
1700846217
7.参见:Brian Wansink,Steven Sonka,Peter Goldsmith,Jorge Chiriboga,and Nilgun Eren,“Increasing the Acceptance of Soy-Based Foods,” Journal of International Food and Agribusiness Marketing 17:1 (2005):33–55。
1700846218
1700846219
8.我还想知道,这些人当中有多少人是苹果电脑的用户。在 www.ConsumerPsychology.com 这一网站上,下载率一度最高的是在《美国人口统计》(American Demographics)上发表的一篇两页长的短文,见:Brian Wansink and Cynthia Sangerman,“Engineering Comfort Foods,” American Demographics (July 2000):66–67。
1700846220
1700846221
9.参见:Brian Wansink and Cynthia Huffman,“A Framework for Revitalizing Mature Brands,” Journal of Brand and Product Management 10:4 (2001):228–42。
1700846222
1700846223
10.部分摘自:Doris Wild Helmering and Dianne Hales,Think Thin,Be Thin (New York:Broadway Books,2004):77。
1700846224
1700846225
11.参见:Brian Wansink,Koert van Ittersum,and Carolina Werle,“How Combat Influences Unfamiliar Food Preferences:Do Marines Eat Japanese Food?”。关于“二战”的消极联想同样影响了人们对德国菜的态度,这也是斯旺森的电视晚宴“巴伐利亚醋焖牛肉、红甘蓝面疙瘩”据称是在 20 世纪 50 年代末惨遭失败的原因之一。
1700846226
1700846227
12.实际上,研究结果不尽如人意,对我们来说已经司空见惯。在一些案例中,我们出了错,比如在“续汤碗”的研究中用的鸡汤面条堵住了续汤的管子。在另一些案例中,有意外发生,比如有人把一个价值 1,400 美元的无线磅秤撸下了桌子。还有一些情况,只能怪我们的研究设计得不够巧妙,不足以达成清晰的答案。这就是我们反复做那么多事的缘故。
1700846228
1700846229
8. 营养把关人
1700846230
1700846231
1.参见:Brian Wansink and Keong-mi Lee,“Cooking Habits Provide a Key to 5 a Day Success,” Journal of the American Dietetic Assocation 104:11 (November 2004):1648–50。
1700846232
1700846233
2.参见:Brian Wansink,“Focus on Nutritional Gatekeepers and the 72% Solution,” Journal of the American Dietetic Association,(September 2006)。有趣的是,我们跟各种不一样的人群反复做过这个测试。厨艺好的人、不下厨的人、年轻的父母、空巢老人、祖母、单身母亲等。他们各有不同,但最后的估计都在 72% 左右。
1700846234
1700846235
3.参见:Brian Wansink and Randall Westgren,“Profiling Taste-Motivated Segments,” Appetite 41:3 (December 2003):323–27;Brian Wansink and JaeHak Cheong,“Taste Profiles that Correlate with Soy Consumption in Developing Countries,” Pakistan Journal of Nutrition 1:6 (December 2002):276–78;Brian Wansink and Keong-mi Lee,“Cooking Habits Provide a Key to 5 a Day Success”。
1700846236
1700846237
4.参见:Brian Wansink,“Profiling Nutritional Gatekeepers:Three Methods for Differentiating Influential Cooks,” Food Quality and Preference 14:4 (June 2003):289–297。
1700846238
1700846239
5.当“营养把关人”研究首度发表时,评审人希望我们更注重方法而不是计算百分比。见:Brian Wansink,“Profiling Nutritional Gatekeepers:Three Methods for Differentiating Influential Cooks,” FoodQualityandPreference14:4(June2003):289–297。百分比参见 Brian Wansink,Marketing Nutrition:Soy,Functional Foods,Biotechnology,and Obesity (Champaign:University of Illinois Press,2005)。
1700846240
1700846241
6.参见:Brian Wansink,Ganaël Bascoul,and Gary T. Chen,“The Sweet Tooth Hypothesis:How Fruit Consumption Relates to Snack Consumption,” Appetite,31:2 (June 2006)。
1700846242
1700846243
7.在家吃饭挑食?振作点。持之以恒终有回报。尝一口不会要人命。利恩·伯奇教授已经证明了,尝一口的次数可能会多达 15 次,但最终孩子们会接受更丰富的口味,而不是只喜欢薯条、冰淇淋和果冻。
1700846244
1700846245
8.参见:Julie A. Mennella and Gary K. Beauchamp,“The Early Development of Human Flavor Preferences” in ed. Elizabeth D. Capaldi,Why We Eat What We Eat:The Psychology of Eating (Washington,D.C.:American Psychological Association,1996)。
[
上一页 ]
[ :1.700846196e+09 ]
[
下一页 ]