Carlos Gómez-Corona , Mette Schleiss , Rafael Barroso , Jeffrey Richard Schmoyer , Jerome Jallat , Maureen Ravily
{"title":"Community voices: A different approach to study low-income populations in consumer research","authors":"Carlos Gómez-Corona , Mette Schleiss , Rafael Barroso , Jeffrey Richard Schmoyer , Jerome Jallat , Maureen Ravily","doi":"10.1016/j.foodqual.2024.105339","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Vulnerable consumers can be defined as individuals facing a disadvantage, where the origin of that disadvantage is usually beyond their control and stems from multiple sources and circumstances. The impact of consumer vulnerability extends to billions of individuals, one of its major circumstances is poverty, or low-income consumers. An estimated 2.4 billion of persons are considered low-income, and yet it is not a common research objective in scientific publications. Our objective is to bring a social approach to study low-income populations called Community Voices, where we partner with local NGO’s to better recruit, perform fieldwork, and return valuable insights to the low-income populations. In our research, three studies were conducted to understand the impact of studying low-income populations. Study 1 focus on comparing the effect of fieldwork environment: impersonal face-to-face interviews versus Community voices approach (N160 per study), Study 2 focus in studying the effect of income differences in participants (low versus high-income, N120 per study), and the effect of type of fieldwork in low-income consumers (online versus face-to-face, N120 per study). The results of study 1 showed significant differences in liking across conditions, study 2 showed significant differences in liking and product perception, but not in emotions. Study 3 showed significant differences in uses and habits towards food choice of plant-based products. Overall, our findings suggest that to study low-income populations, the researcher cannot generalize the results of other populations (e.g., high-income) to lower income populations, and con not use standard methodologies and expect the same results.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":322,"journal":{"name":"Food Quality and Preference","volume":"123 ","pages":"Article 105339"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Food Quality and Preference","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0950329324002416","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"FOOD SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Vulnerable consumers can be defined as individuals facing a disadvantage, where the origin of that disadvantage is usually beyond their control and stems from multiple sources and circumstances. The impact of consumer vulnerability extends to billions of individuals, one of its major circumstances is poverty, or low-income consumers. An estimated 2.4 billion of persons are considered low-income, and yet it is not a common research objective in scientific publications. Our objective is to bring a social approach to study low-income populations called Community Voices, where we partner with local NGO’s to better recruit, perform fieldwork, and return valuable insights to the low-income populations. In our research, three studies were conducted to understand the impact of studying low-income populations. Study 1 focus on comparing the effect of fieldwork environment: impersonal face-to-face interviews versus Community voices approach (N160 per study), Study 2 focus in studying the effect of income differences in participants (low versus high-income, N120 per study), and the effect of type of fieldwork in low-income consumers (online versus face-to-face, N120 per study). The results of study 1 showed significant differences in liking across conditions, study 2 showed significant differences in liking and product perception, but not in emotions. Study 3 showed significant differences in uses and habits towards food choice of plant-based products. Overall, our findings suggest that to study low-income populations, the researcher cannot generalize the results of other populations (e.g., high-income) to lower income populations, and con not use standard methodologies and expect the same results.
期刊介绍:
Food Quality and Preference is a journal devoted to sensory, consumer and behavioural research in food and non-food products. It publishes original research, critical reviews, and short communications in sensory and consumer science, and sensometrics. In addition, the journal publishes special invited issues on important timely topics and from relevant conferences. These are aimed at bridging the gap between research and application, bringing together authors and readers in consumer and market research, sensory science, sensometrics and sensory evaluation, nutrition and food choice, as well as food research, product development and sensory quality assurance. Submissions to Food Quality and Preference are limited to papers that include some form of human measurement; papers that are limited to physical/chemical measures or the routine application of sensory, consumer or econometric analysis will not be considered unless they specifically make a novel scientific contribution in line with the journal''s coverage as outlined below.