IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/rug/rugwps/05-351.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Consumers’ quality perception as a basis for fish market segmentation in Belgium

Author

Listed:
  • W. VERBEKE
  • I. VERMEIR
  • Z. PIENIAK
  • K. BRUNSØ

Abstract

This paper focuses on consumers’ quality perception of fish in Belgium and its impact on interest in information, beliefs and behaviour. Cross-sectional data were collected from a sample of 429 consumers in March 2003. Two dimensions shape fish quality perception: consumer involvement with fish quality and consumers’ self-estimated ability to assess fish quality, which allow segmenting the market in four fish consumer segments. The segments are typified as Uninvolved, Insecure, Self-confident and Connoisseurs, and have distinctive socio-demographic, attitudinal and behavioural profiles. The Uninvolved are mainly young males, have the lowest fish consumption level, weakest belief in health benefits from eating fish, and lowest interest in both search and credence information cues. Insecure fish consumers are mainly females, with a tendency of lower education and urban residence, who feel not able to evaluate fish quality, although they find quality very important. They display a strong interest in a fish quality label. The most relevant facts about Self-confident consumers, who display an average socio-demographic profile, are their high fish consumption level, and their low interest in a fish quality label. Connoisseurs are mainly females in the age category 55+, who are strongly involved with food in general and well aware of the association between food and health. They have the highest fish consumption and show a strong interest in both search and credence cues, as well as in a fish quality label. The segments do not differ with respect to risk perception about fish.

Suggested Citation

  • W. Verbeke & I. Vermeir & Z. Pieniak & K. Brunsø, 2005. "Consumers’ quality perception as a basis for fish market segmentation in Belgium," Working Papers of Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Ghent University, Belgium 05/351, Ghent University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration.
  • Handle: RePEc:rug:rugwps:05/351
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://wps-feb.ugent.be/Papers/wp_05_351.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Celsi, Richard L & Olson, Jerry C, 1988. "The Role of Involvement in Attention and Comprehension Processes," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 15(2), pages 210-224, September.
    2. Rao, Akshay R & Bergen, Mark E, 1992. "Price Premium Variations as a Consequence of Buyers' Lack of Information," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 19(3), pages 412-423, December.
    3. Darby, Michael R & Karni, Edi, 1973. "Free Competition and the Optimal Amount of Fraud," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 16(1), pages 67-88, April.
    4. Gerard J. Tellis & Birger Wernerfelt, 1987. "Competitive Price and Quality Under Asymmetric Information," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 6(3), pages 240-253.
    5. Nelson, Philip, 1974. "Advertising as Information," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 82(4), pages 729-754, July/Aug..
    6. Brunsø, Karen & Fjord, Thomas Ahle & Grunert, Klaus G., 2002. "Consumers' food choice and quality perception," MAPP Working Papers 77, University of Aarhus, Aarhus School of Business, The MAPP Centre.
    7. Bettman, James R & Luce, Mary Frances & Payne, John W, 1998. "Constructive Consumer Choice Processes," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 25(3), pages 187-217, December.
    8. Rao, Akshay R & Monroe, Kent B, 1988. "The Moderating Effect of Prior Knowledge on Cue Utilization in Product Evaluations," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 15(2), pages 253-264, September.
    9. Carl Shapiro, 1983. "Premiums for High Quality Products as Returns to Reputations," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 98(4), pages 659-679.
    10. Steenkamp, Jan-Benedict E. M., 1990. "Conceptual model of the quality perception process," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 21(4), pages 309-333, December.
    11. Nelson, Phillip, 1970. "Information and Consumer Behavior," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 78(2), pages 311-329, March-Apr.
    12. Pechmann, Cornelia & Ratneshwar, S, 1992. "Consumer Covariation Judgments: Theory or Data Driven?," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 19(3), pages 373-386, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Emini, Adelina & Zeqiri, Jusuf, 2021. "The Impact of Social Media Marketing on Purchase Intention in a Transition Economy: The Mediating Role of Brand Awareness and Brand Engagement," Proceedings of the ENTRENOVA - ENTerprise REsearch InNOVAtion Conference (2021), Hybrid Conference, Zagreb, Croatia, in: Proceedings of the ENTRENOVA - ENTerprise REsearch InNOVAtion Conference, Hybrid Conference, Zagreb, Croatia, 9-10 September 2021, pages 256-266, IRENET - Society for Advancing Innovation and Research in Economy, Zagreb.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Lawley, Meredith & Birch, Dawn & Hamblin, Denise, 2012. "An exploratory study into the role and interplay of intrinsic and extrinsic cues in Australian consumers’ evaluations of fish," Australasian marketing journal, Elsevier, vol. 20(4), pages 260-267.
    2. Marco Costanigro & Yuko Onozaka, 2020. "A Belief‐Preference Model of Choice for Experience and Credence Goods," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 71(1), pages 70-95, February.
    3. Olivier Gergaud & Florine Livat, 2004. "Team versus individual reputations: a model of interaction and some empirical evidence," Cahiers de la Maison des Sciences Economiques bla04015, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1).
    4. Linder, Christian & Seidenstricker, Sven, 2018. "How does a component from a supplier with high reputation for product innovation improve the perception of a final offering? A process perspective," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 288-299.
    5. Shalom Levy & Israel Nebenzahl, 2008. "The influence of product involvement on consumers’ interactive processes in interactive television," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 19(1), pages 65-77, March.
    6. Heribert Gierl & Julia Koncz, 2007. "Unternehmenswachstum und Internationalität als Qualitätssignale," Metrika: International Journal for Theoretical and Applied Statistics, Springer, vol. 17(4), pages 389-409, January.
    7. Guang-Xin Xie & Robert Madrigal & David Boush, 2015. "Disentangling the Effects of Perceived Deception and Anticipated Harm on Consumer Responses to Deceptive Advertising," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 129(2), pages 281-293, June.
    8. Caves, Richard E. & Greene, David P., 1996. "Brands' quality levels, prices, and advertising outlays: empirical evidence on signals and information costs," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 14(1), pages 29-52.
    9. Szymanowski, M.G., 2009. "Consumption-based learning about brand quality : Essays on how private labels share and borrow reputation," Other publications TiSEM b12825d8-5e21-4437-adda-b, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    10. Benner, Dietrich, 2004. "Quality Ambiguity and the Market Mechanism for Credence Goods," Working Papers 98639, Universitaet Hohenheim, Institute of Agricultural Policy and Agricultural Markets.
    11. Franziska Rischkowsky & Thomas Döring, 2008. "Consumer Policy in a Market Economy Considerations from the Perspective of the Economics of Information, the New Institutional Economics as well as Behavioural Economics," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 31(3), pages 285-313, September.
    12. Franklin G. Mixon & Chandini Sankaran & Kamal P. Upadhyaya, 2019. "Is Political Ideology Stable? Evidence from Long-Serving Members of the United States Congress," Economies, MDPI, vol. 7(2), pages 1-19, May.
    13. Compeau, Larry D. & Grewal, Dhruv & Monroe, Kent B., 1998. "Role of Prior Affect and Sensory Cues on Consumers' Affective and Cognitive Responses and Overall Perceptions of Quality," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 295-308, July.
    14. Rao, Akshay R & Monroe, Kent B, 1996. "Causes and Consequences of Price Premiums," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 69(4), pages 511-535, October.
    15. Alessandro Bonanno & Carlo Russo & Luisa Menapace, 2018. "Market power and bargaining in agrifood markets: A review of emerging topics and tools," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 34(1), pages 6-23, December.
    16. Costanigro, Marco & Scozzafava, Gabriele & Casini, Leonardo, 2019. "Vertical differentiation via multi-tier geographical indications and the consumer perception of quality: The case of Chianti wines," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 246-259.
    17. Maity, Moutusy & Dass, Mayukh & Malhotra, Naresh K., 2014. "The Antecedents and Moderators of Offline Information Search: A Meta-Analysis," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 90(2), pages 233-254.
    18. Brach, Simon & Walsh, Gianfranco & Shaw, Deirdre, 2018. "Sustainable consumption and third-party certification labels: Consumers’ perceptions and reactions," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 254-265.
    19. Mariola Grzybowska-Brzezińska & Dominika Kuberska & Magdalena Ankiel & Agnieszka Brelik, 2020. "Consumer’s Behavior in a Multi-Attribute Concept of a Food Product," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(1), pages 526-551.
    20. Bartke, Stephan, 2015. "The economic role of valuers in real property markets," UFZ Discussion Papers 13/2015, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research (UFZ), Division of Social Sciences (ÖKUS).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Fish; Consumer; Quality; Perception; Information; Segmentation;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:rug:rugwps:05/351. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Nathalie Verhaeghe (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ferugbe.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.