Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
MARKETING R
ES
EA
RC
H O
N THE SEN
SUALITY O
F PR
OD
UC
TS
edited by Aradhna Krishna
University o
f Michigan
Ann A
rbor, Michigan
~~ ~~o~;~~n~~~up N
ew Y
ork lon
don
:2_010
19
Psych
olo
gy an
d S
enso
ry Ma
rke
ting
, W
ith a F
ocu
s on
Food
Paul R
ozin an
d ju
lia M
. Ha
rme
s
The Pow
er of S
ensation and the Perception o
f "Mo
uth
Ob
jects"
One of the hardest reservations to get in the w
orld•is for dinner at El B
ulli, in northeast S
pain, the world's m
ost creative restaurant and by man
y con
sidered to be the best. The chef, F
erran Adria, essentially the founder of
molecular gastronom
y, has added new dim
ensions to the experience of food. L
argely by changing the physical form of food w
ith high technology, using foam
s, gels, and the like, coupled with an exquisite aesthetic sense of
what w
orks for the human palate, A
dria has created a panoply of new
food experiences. T
here were 34 of them
in a 6-hour m
eal one of us (PR
) had the pleasure o
f consuming a few
years ago. This extraordinary sensory experi
ence does not need to be marketed, since reservations are essentially unat
tainable. (It is no
t true that El Bulli is so popular that nobody goes there
anymore!) T
his new w
ave in cooking, spreading around the Western w
orld, gives us an integrated m
ultisensory experience, with a special focus o
n the
texture of foods an
d textural contrasts. T
he smells, tastes, flavors, feels,
sights, and sounds of food provide an
enveloping experience. On
e example
from E
l Bulli: a glass containing at the bottom
a steaming hot, arom
atic extract of pine nuts. T
he hot liquid sits at the bottom of a glass, the top of
which is coated in
a layer of ice. When you sip it, you get all the aro
ma that
comes from
a ho
t aromatic substance paired w
ith the cold temperature that
normally suppresses arom
a: a new an
d unexpected experience. M
olecular gastronom
y sets the stage for a discussion of sensory m
arketing. W
hen
it comes to senses, m
uch of psychology has been focused on
exploring vision an
d hearing.
Vision an
d hearing can legitim
ately be thought to be o
ur m
ost important senses, as indicated by the devastation
303
304 P
aul Rozin and Julia M
. Ha
rme
s
TAB
LE 19.1 T
he H
um
an S
enses
Distance/
Sense
Surface/Internal
Valence
Vision
Distance
Neutral
Hearing
Distance
Neutral
Haptic*
Surface
Negative/neutral!positive
Sm
ell D
istance/internal N
egative/positive T
aste Internal
Negative/positive
Visceral
Internal N
egative M
uscle Internal
Negative/ neutral
Equilibrium
Internal
Neutral
*Including touch, irritation, tem
perature sense, and
pain.
Com
ment
Incorporative
Du
al! incorporative
Incorporative
caused by blindness and deafness. The eyes and e
ars-b
oth
distance recepto
rs-con
stitute our principal w
ay of finding out about the w
orld arou
nd
us. It is quite easy to generate stim
uli in vision and
hearing, and the very fast response tim
e of the system
allows for exquisite tem
poral control of
stimuli, such as flashes o
f light. In their reasonably "raw" form
s, excluding that very sm
all subset of all visual and auditory experiences that w
e might
call art and music, light and sound are affectively neutral. T
hey serve prin
cipally to inform
about what is going on in th
e outside world
. The o
ther
senses are often characterized as the "minor" senses (T
able 19.1). Th
ree
taste, smell, an
d contact/haptic-sensations constitute the core of the food
experience. Since eating is a m
ajor activity of hum
ans, the third most tim
e consum
ing (including preparation of food), an
d the single m
ost economi
cally important activity o
f humans, the senses that contribute m
ost to the
appeal of food are perhaps not so min
or after all, and certainly w
orthy of
study. Unlike sights and sounds, m
ost tastes, smells, and feels (skin sen
sations) are positive or negative in valence. Although there is im
portant participation from
sight and
sound, the major aspect o
f eating is mo
uth
sensations, w
hich are a combination of taste, sm
ell, and a number o
f haptic m
odalities, including irritation or pain, contact, an
d hot or cold. T
he m
outh is a highly innervated organ, and along with the hands, the only
sense organ that actually m
anipulates the stimulus. W
hat w
e perceive is food objects, a blend o
f taste, smell, and haptic inputs. Indeed, flavor is a
seamless com
bination of taste and sm
ell. The distinctive qualities o
f most
foods are conveyed by odor carried from the m
ou
th to the nose, via the ret
ronasal route, bu
t the sensation is experienced as coming from
the mo
uth
. H
ence, the surprise when people discover that w
hen they have a head cold that blocks the sense o
f smell, food loses m
uch of its taste. W
hen we eat,
Psychology and S
ensory Ma
rketin
g, W
ith a Fo
cus on Food
305
we do not experience m
odalities, we experience "m
outh objects." These
objects change their pro
perties-tex
tures, tem
peratures, flavo
rs-as we
chew them
, and
they produce a dynamic range o
f sensations in the period
of a few to m
any
seconds that we m
ight describe as a bite, a unit of eating.
The experience of a bite of chocolate m
ay last for m
inutes: In the first
stages, the sight of the w
rapped chocolate, the smell as it is unw
rapped, the feel of the chocolate in the hand; then, the bite itself. T
he initial firm
impact, the grow
ing aroma as the chocolate w
arms in the m
outh and
coats the inner surfaces, the change in texture from
firm to a thick, silky liquid,
the slide down the throat, and the en
du
ring
after-flavor. A bite o
f chocolate is a m
inisymphony o
f experiences. Individuals differ in their acuity w
ith respect to
the various senses involved in eating, as they do in audition an
d vision. In particular, there are
many different bitter receptors in the m
ou
th, and at least a few
are known
to be absent in some individuals based o
n th
e presence or absence of spe
cific genes. Olfactory acuity varies w
idely, and
the,olfactory sense deteriorates m
ore with age than m
any other systems, such as the taste system
. A
lthough it is sort of absurd to ask individuals how
important vision o
r hearing is for them
, it is quite reasonable to ask about the imp
ortan
ce of
smell, and w
e have done this (Wrzesniew
ski, McC
auley, & R
ozin, 1999). For exam
ple, inquiring of both B
elgian and
Am
erican college students, we
asked what w
as the worst thing to lose: th
e sense of sm
ell, hearing in one
ear, or the big toe on one foot. About h
alf of respondents th
ou
gh
t losing the sense o
f smell w
as most threatening. O
f course, many did n
ot realize
that food would lose m
ost of its "taste" with
ou
t a sense of smell. W
e developed a m
easure of the im
portance of o
do
r to individuals and fou
nd
wide
variation. Most o
f it was not attributable to olfactory acuity (also assessed
by self-report), but rather to the value placed on olfactory sensations: food arom
as, perfumes, the sm
ells of the n
atural w
orld, and so forth. G
estalt psychology was a m
ajor movem
ent in psychology in the m
iddle o
f the 20th century. Originating in studies o
f perception, it emphasized
the importance o
f context. The role o
f context cannot be exaggerated, but it is still often ignored in research in psychology, perhaps because context m
akes things complicated
. It requires exp
and
ing
the universe of concern
beyond what laboratory experim
enters wan
t to do. It means co
nsidering
a sensory experience in terms o
f its imm
ediate precursors and successors.
The chocolate bite is not captured in a m
om
entary
flash of sensation. T
he m
elt-in-the-mouth process is critical. P
art of the experience of a bite o
f an
egg roll is the change in sensation as on
e bites into different components,
of different crispness an
d different flavors, each producing a m
om
entary
306 P
aul R
ozin and Julia M. H
arm
es
burst of mouth experience. C
lassic taste research using water solutions of
glucose or sodium chloride bypasses these critical contexts, the contexts
that make eating food such a pleasant, often aesthetic experience. S
tudies on the sensory side of eating rarely consider the dynam
ic unfolding of
mouth experiences over sh
ort periods of tim
e (see Hyde and W
itherly [1993]
for an extended discussion of this perspective an
d the papers o
f P
angborn et al. [Larson-P
owers &
Pangborn, 2006; P
angborn, 1980]). F
or the case of eating, an
d by the w
ay also the appreciation of m
ost other products, such as
clothing, the important context extends w
ell beyond the seconds o
f actual exposure. This m
akes it all the more im
portant to expand the universe o
f concern, and all the more difficult to do
rigorous experimentation.
A piece of chocolate m
ay taste delicious until one discovers that it was
harvested with child labor o
r contained detectable insect residues. A sub
tly flavored fish pate may be perceived as exquisite at a fine restaurant but
tasteless at a local diner. Wansink, Payne, an
d N
orth
(2007) report that the sam
e wine is judged to be low
er in sensory quality if it has a label that indicates that it com
es from N
orth Dakota as opposed to C
alifornia. S
ome people w
ho claim to love C
oke and hate Pepsi can
no
t tell them apart
in taste tests. Chicken in
a sauce flavored with chocolate (one variety o
f M
exican mole) m
ay be found distasteful because of the know
n mixture o
f chocolate w
ith a savory food, rather than because of a detached judgm
ent o
f the orosensory experience. Many people th
ink
bottled water tastes
superior to tap water, w
hen they in fact cannot tell them apart. B
ut it is im
portant to realize that to the Coke-lover, P
epsi-hater, who cannot tell
them apart, C
oca-Cola d
run
k from
a properly labeled bottle does taste better than P
epsi (if Coca-C
ola had realized this, they would not have pro
duced the new C
oke). The taste experience o
f a food, the liking for the
food, includes the broad context in which it is consum
ed. It includes the im
mediate social context; the reactions of those one is eating w
ith influence the experience a person has.
Just as it is unreasonable to thin
k that P
icasso's great artistic output is a result of extraordinary visual acuity he appreciation o
f food is only weakly
based on matters o
f acuity. Like all perception, evaluating food (or cloth
ing, movies, cars o
r any other product, for that m
atter) involves a blend o
f bo
ttom
-up
and
top
-do
wn
processes. So far as we know
, people who
like the burn of chili pepper an
d people w
ho do no
t are getting the same
irritation signal from th
eir mouth. It is their interpretation that changes.
Furtherm
ore, most chili likers do not enjoy the disem
bodied burn of chili,
Psycholo
gy and Sensory M
arke
ting
, With
a Focus on Food
307
but want that b
urn
in association with th
e flavor of the peppers an
d the
other associated foods. T
he context expands further (see Kass [1994] an
d R
ozin [2007a] for discussions of eating in a cultural context). F
ood is a basic source of nutrition.
That is its fundam
ental function. B
ut in hu
man
cultural history, by a process w
e describe as cultural preadaptation, the initial purpose of food has
been expanded so that it serves many o
ther functions. T
he aesthetic function is obvious. B
ut it also serves a variety of social functions, as w
ith chocolate gifts in a rom
antic context, as with m
eeting a new person over a m
eal, as in discussing fam
ily issues over the din
ner table. M
eals are occasions, som
etimes the principal occasions, for social interaction. The m
uch longer th
an 1-hour duration of a French dinner is significantly m
ore than
the time
it takes to consume the food. It involves savoring the food, discussing it, and
general conviviality. For som
e minority in
Western developed cultures eat
ing is like refueling, but for most it is an anticipated pleasure. O
f course, for m
any wom
en in developed Western cultures, it is iln am
bivalent experience: enjoying the sensations but feeling bad about taking in calories.
Food also enters into the m
oral domain, as h
as clearly happened with
alcohol and tobacco in A
merican culture, an
d m
ore subtly now w
ith stigm
atization of obesity an
d high-fat foods. In o
ther cultural contexts, food
in general has moral im
plications. With
in the H
ind
u caste system
, particular foods, and the social status o
f the preparers of the food, have strong
moral im
plications. Appadurai (1981) describes food as a "biom
oral" substance in H
indu India. T
he specific powerful influence of culture on the appreciation o
f food and the evaluation o
f its sensory properties can be described u
nd
er the generic term
"cuisine." Elisabeth R
ozin (1982, 1983) analyzes cuisine, focusing on the actual dishes, in three com
ponents: staple foods, preparation
techniques, and flavor principles. Thus, C
hinese cuisine focuses on rice as a principal staple, the stir-fry technique, and a flavor principle m
ade up of
soy sauce, ginger root, and rice wine. T
he flavor principles, a quintessentially sensory com
ponent, more than any o
ther feature o
f the food, bestow the
ethnic quality on the food. Potatoes m
ade w
ith Chinese flavor principles
taste Chinese (even though potatoes are rarely used in C
hinese cuisine), and potatoes m
ade with M
exican flavor principles (e.g., chili and tomato) taste
Mexican. In addition to the characteristic sensory com
binations, derived from
staples, techniques, and flavor principles that characterize a cuisine,
there are a whole set o
f additional contexts that are p
art of the cultural fram
e of food consumption. T
hese include table manners, the utensils used,
the social organization of eating, and th
e order of courses. H
oward S
chutz
308 Paul R
ozin and Julia M. H
armes
(1989) describes many of these traditions w
ith the term "appropriateness."
Thus, in the U
nited States and many other countries, there are foods par
ticularly appropriate for breakfast and others for special holidays. There are
combinations of food that are discouraged, such as m
any mixtures of sw
eet and savory substances in m
ost Euro-A
merican cuisines. W
hipped cream
and meat are each typically desired foods, but not appropriate (or liked) in
combination. F
or similar appropriateness reasons, carbonated m
ilk was a
failure on the Am
erican market, as w
as carbonated coffee (coffee soda). So far as w
e can tell, many of these rules are the arbitrary results o
f culinary history, although som
e can be argued to be nutritionally adaptive or enhancing of certain generally appealing aspects of food flavors.
In any particular cuisine, certain foods and flavors find very restricted
uses, and others are widely em
ployed. In Italy, garlic is appropriate on
almost any savory food, as is soy sauce on alm
ost any savory food in C
hina. Coffee, on the other hand, in alm
ost all cultures that consume it, is
narrowly restricted to a hot beverage context; it is rarely used as a flavoring
and virtually never in savory foods.
Sensory P
leasure as a Particular T
ype of P
leasure
Most of w
hat we do, and buy, is m
otivated by either necessity or increasing pleasure. A
s wealth increases, the im
portance of maxim
izing pleasure grow
s with respect to m
eeting basic biological needs. Thus, w
hile food constitutes about 50%
of total expenses in developing world countries, it
falls to below 20%
in the developed world. O
f course, there is no com
plementarity betw
een pleasure and necessity. Food is perhaps the m
ajor dom
ain in which the tw
o motivations interact. A
t least in the developed W
estern world, w
here it has been assessed, flavor (read pleasure) is the m
ajor determinant of food
choice (assum
ing availability and affordability). D
epending on the individual and the culture, other prominent
reasons are tradition, convenience, and
perceived healthiness. Given the
central role of m
aximizing pleasure in choice, in food and elsew
here, it is very appropriate to discuss pleasure in the context of sensory m
arketing. M
any of the pleasures of food, that is, of eating food, are rather elem
ental and raw
, and hence can be called sensory pleasures. A
ccording to some fram
eworks (R
ozin, 1999), one can partition pleasures into three types: sensory, aesthetic, and m
astery. Sensory pleasures
are relatively unadorned, such as the taste of sw
eet, the aroma o
f chocolate, the feel o
f massage, the sensations associated w
ith sexual arousal and
Psychology and Sensory Marketing, W
ith a Focus on Food 309
orgasm. T
hese pleasures are context sensitive; but in the usual experience, w
here the context is positive and appropriate, they produce a rather simple
enjoyment. A
lthough they show adaptation over short periods, they can
be experienced hundreds or thousands of tim
es over a period of m
onths to years w
ithout declining. A good piece o
f chocolate is a sensory pleasure today, tom
orrow, and every day o
f the week for a year. A
esthetic pleasures typically have a sensory root, but are m
ore cognitively elaborated, and more
likely to be acquired over a period of tim
e (note that Krishna an
d E
lder's chapter in this volum
e suggests that sensory pleasures are also cognitively elaborated on; thus the distinction betw
een sensory and aesthetic is a mat
ter of degree and type of elaboration). They are often m
odality specific, as w
ith the enjoyment of Picasso or M
ozart, but the representations in the
mind/brain that give rise to these pleasures m
ust be many synapses aw
ay from
primary sensory cortical representations. In the dom
ain of food,
the appreciation of fine wines and other elaborated foods constitute sen
sory derived but yet aesthetic pleasures. A third source o
f pleasure comes
from the sense of m
astery, for example, the accom
plishment o
f being able to perform
something challenging (from
walking, to riding a bicycle, to
playing the piano). But just as aesthetic an
d sensory pleasures are linked,
so too are mastery and aesthetic pleasures. Som
e types of m
astery are not instantiated by skills, but rather by appreciation. A
s one learns to identify different grapes and vintages in the process o
f becoming a w
ine connoisseur, there is a sense of aesthetic m
astery. S
ensory marketing relates m
ost directly to sensory pleasure. How
ever, since sensations are at the root o
f most aesthetic and m
any mastery plea
sures, all three types of pleasure have a place in sensory marketing. A
sweet
taste may be quite sim
ple and sensory; the experience of chocolate has strong
basic sensory roots, but it can move into the aesthetic dom
ain as one become
sensitive to the subtleties of chocolate aroma and the qualities o
f the mouth
melting experience and inform
ed about the sources and nature of process
ing of particular chocolates. The pleasures o
f Mozart are alm
ost incidentally auditory; it is in large part the internal structure, cognitively appreciated, that provides the pleasure. W
e will focus principally on sensory pleasures,
primarily in the dom
ain of food, as we adopt a tem
poral perspective.
Th
e T
em
po
ral D
om
ain
s of S
ensory Pleasure
An
experience can last for a mom
ent, a few m
oments, or an
ho
ur o
r m
ore, for the case of a meal o
r an opera. A m
eal is a natural un
it of eating
310 P
aul Rozin and Julia M
. Ha
rme
s
(Meiselm
an, 2000; Pliner &
Rozin, 2000). In the fo
od
domain, it is p
rob
ably at the "basic" u
nit level, so th
at we say, for exam
ple, "that was a great
meal." O
n th
e oth
er han
d, w
e are unlikely to lum
p yesterday's lu
nch
and
dinner into a u
nit, an
d hence w
ill rarely assign an affective value to such
a combination. O
f course, there are imp
ortan
t smaller units in th
e food dom
ain, most p
articularly
the bite, the dish, an
d th
e course. Any o
f these sm
aller units can an
d often are given evaluative labels, especially dishes
("the omelette w
as delicious"). D
aniel Kah
nem
an, often in collaboration w
ith B
arbara Fredrickson
(Fredrickson,
2000; F
redrickson &
K
ahn
eman
, 1993;
Kah
nem
an,
Fredrickson, S
chreiber, & R
edelmeier, 1993) has p
rov
ided
a powerful fram
ew
ork for un
derstan
din
g pleasure in its tem
poral do
main
s (Kah
nem
an,
Wakker, &
Sarin, 1997). T
hey refer to experienced (E), rem
emb
ered (R
), and anticipated (A
) pleasure. The m
eanin
gs of th
ese terms are obvious,
once this classification is expressed. Of course, th
is ER
A fram
ework is
contingent on
the selection o
f the reference unit, that is, the definition o
f the present. F
or example, for eating, is it the bite o
r is it the meal?
Kah
nem
an et al. (1997) have m
ade imp
ortan
t claims about th
e relations betw
een present and
prospect and
between present an
d past. T
he m
ost critical claim ab
ou
t present and
prospect is that people are quite
poor at anticipating future experienced pleasures. That is, o
n the basis o
f the present, they often m
ake p
oo
r predictions abo
ut how
they will enjoy a
particular experience. In the initial stu
dy
by Kah
nem
an an
d S
nell (1992), individuals sam
pled
a flavored yogurt and
rated their liking for it an
d
agreed to eat the sam
e yo
gu
rt every day for a week. A
t the onset, they
were
asked to estimate how
mu
ch they w
ould like the yo
gu
rt after 1 week. T
hen after 1 w
eek of experience, th
ey rated it again. T
he predicted and
actual ratings w
ere essentially uncorrelated. A subsequent stu
dy
(Rozin, H
ank
o,
& D
urlach, 2006) exposed individuals to four new
products (two unfa
miliar E
ast Asian food snacks and an
un
familiar toothpaste an
d show
er gel). A
gain, accord
ing
to the procedure of K
ahn
eman
and
Snell (1992),
individuals tried an
d rated their lik
ing
for each product, agreed to use each daily, an
d estim
ated w
hat their ratings w
ould be after a w
eek of use.
Again, as w
ith th
e Kah
nem
an results, people w
ere po
or at anticipating th
e changes in th
eir preferences. They often w
ere inco
rrect in even predicting the direction o
f change. Tw
o oth
er findings of interest em
erged from
this study. First, relative accuracy at p
redictin
g th
e change for any
on
e product did not p
redict accuracy for p
redictin
g changes for o
ther p
rod
ucts. S
econd, the p
articipan
ts in this stu
dy
were 20 college stu
den
ts and
20 parents (one p
arent from
each of th
e students). We hypothesized th
at
Psychology and Sensory M
arke
ting
, With
a Focus o
n Food
311
with
age people would have a great deal o
f experience with th
eir hedonic trajectories an
d becom
e better at anticip
ating
hedonic changes. In fact, th
ere was no im
provement at all co
nseq
uen
t on mo
re than
20 additional years o
f experience with oneself.
Th
e inability to predict the effect of ex
po
sure o
n one's fu
ture sensory
and
oth
er preferences is imp
ortan
t for marketing, especially since people
are typically unaware of how
po
orly
they
perform in
this do
main
. Much
of the inaccuracy com
es from overconfidence that th
e present reaction to a n
ew en
tity w
ill be like the future reaction
once it has beco
me fam
iliar. P
eople typically both underestimate ad
aptatio
n (L
oewenstein &
Frederick,
1997) and
underestimate the positive effects o
f mere exposure o
n increas
ing likin
g. TI1is causes them
, for exam
ple
, to mak
e lon
g-term
comm
itm
ents to p
rod
ucts (such as an
nu
al sub
scriptio
ns to an
initially engaging m
agazine) on the assum
ption that p
resent responses w
ill be sustained,
or to fail to
give a new p
rod
uct a seco
nd
chance if the initial response is
mildly negative o
r neutral. T
he stud
y o
f the relations betw
een experienced ~nd remem
bered
pleasure by K
ahn
eman
and
others (Frederickson, 2000; F
redrickson & K
ahn
eman
, 1993; K
ahn
eman
et a!., 1993) has b
een a particularly fertile
area. This
research, based almost entirely on h
edo
nically
negative experiences, has led to
three principles th
at represent majo
r distortions of experience th
at o
ccur w
hen the experience is
remem
bered
. The h
edo
nic p
eak (i.e., th
e m
ost h
igh
ly valenced point in th
e experience) and
the h
edo
nic state at th
e en
d p
oin
t of the experience have a p
redo
min
ant influence on th
e mem
ory
for th
e experience (the "peak-end" rule). The p
eak ru
le is often apparent, as w
hen
a few seconds o
f discomfort in
the dentist ch
air completely d
om
inate th
e hedonic mem
ory of a h
alf ho
ur o
f more o
r less painless experience. T
he third rule is described as du
ration
neglect: ou
r mem
ory
does n
ot seem
to track duration w
ell and
tend
s to remem
ber events an
d n
ot
their d
uratio
n. A
s a result, a con
tinu
ou
s or repetitive experience is typi
cally remem
bered
as a single event. Tw
o or eight sips o
f an excellent w
ine
tend
to be rem
embered as the sam
e sipp
ing
of the win
e and
the associated
flavor experience. We have ex
tend
ed th
is work on rem
emb
ered pleasure
into
the positive dom
ains of en
joy
men
t of m
eals (Rode, R
ozin, & D
urlach, 2007), m
usic (Rozin, G
uillot, & R
ozin, in preparation; R
ozin, Rozin, &
G
oldberg, 2004), and
art exhibits (Ro
zin &
Taylor, in preparation). W
e find pow
erful support for du
ration
neglect; for example, d
ou
blin
g th
e size o
f the p
ortio
n o
f the favorite food in a m
eal, wh
ich clearly increases
exp
erienced
pleasure, has no effect on
remem
bered
pleasure. On
the oth
er h
and
, we have not found reliable ev
iden
ce for a peak
effect (a particu
larly
312 P
aul Rozin and Julia M
. Ha
rme
s
strong effect in an
overall evaluation from
the favorite paintings in
an art
exhibit, a favorite musical selection in a "concert," o
r a favorite dish in a
meal). O
ur ow
n experience suggests a strong peak
effect, bu
t we have b
een
unable to find it in controlled laboratory situations. In
these studies, we
have found abo
ut as m
uch
evidence for a prim
acy as an en
d effect. W
e still do not k
no
w th
e conditions under wh
ich peak, end, an
d onset co
me
to dominate an experience. W
e also do no
t kn
ow
the conditions that b
lun
t duration neglect, alth
ou
gh
it is likely that division o
f an event into d
istinct
segments m
ay be on
e factor that reduces it (A
riely & Z
auberman, 2000).
The disparity betw
een experienced and
remem
bered
pleasure has majo
r im
plications for mark
eting
. At the point o
f purchase, say in a food store or
restaurant, we consult o
ur m
em
ory of th
e food or dish in question, since
we d
o n
ot have d
irect access to ou
r past experience with
it. Hence, the rep
resentation o
f past experiences in
mem
ory
is the critical base for u
nd
erstan
din
g m
ost curren
t choices. (Obviously, th
is is no
t true in cases w
here
a person is actually samp
ling
the choice o
f foods available or directly co
m
parin
g item
s of clothing o
r pictures.)
Ind
ividu
al and C
ultural Differences in E
RA
Profiles
Individuals vary in the amo
un
t of tim
e and
imp
ortan
ce they devote to experiencing in th
e mo
men
t, rehearsing mem
ories, and
anticipating the
future (Rozin &
Han
ko
, in preparation). A
great m
eal may last 2 hours, b
ut
its mem
ory
may b
e activated for dozens of h
ou
rs over the following years.
An
d th
e second visit to the source o
f the great m
eal may engage m
any
h
ou
rs of anticipation. W
hen
a person chooses to schedule an anticip
ated
positive event in th
e near o
r distan
t future, he o
r she is mak
ing
a choice about w
hether to increase anticipation, at the cost o
f having less time to
"consum
e" the mem
ory, or reducing anticipation in
order to have mo
re tim
e to remem
ber. People differ in the decisions they m
ake in choices
of th
is sort. So far as ou
r still unpublished data indicate, th
eir pattern
of
favoring anticipation or m
emo
ry tends n
ot to
be general bu
t rather spe
cific to particu
lar do
main
s (Rozin, H
ank
o, &
Gohar, 2009; R
ozin, Rem
ick
& F
ischler, 2008). Som
e people, faced with
a platter of three foods (say the stan
dard
meat, potatoes, an
d vegetable), consistently eat their favor
ite food first, oth
ers eat their favorite food last, an
d m
any
do neither. Bu
t the people w
ho eat their favorite food first are no
t more likely to listen to
th
eir favorite music first th
an those w
ho eat their favorite food last (R
ozin, H
ank
o, &
Gohar, in
preparation).
Psychology and S
ensory Ma
rketin
g, With
a Focus on F
ood 313
It is pro
bab
ly tru
e that cultures differ in
the im
po
rtance they b
estow
on
m
emories versus anticipation (perhaps translatable into th
e past vs. th
e future), an
d it is also
likely that the rem
emb
ered or anticipated b
alance
shifts with
age. Old
er people have the sam
e potential experience anticipating a positive event th
at will occur in
the n
ear future, bu
t will h
ave less
op
po
rtun
ity to co
nsu
me the m
emo
ry because o
f a shorter lifespan ahead
. T
he utility
of b
uild
ing
mem
ories declines with
age, even assum
ing
the
acuity of m
emo
ry rem
ains intact! The psychology o
f savoring and
remi
niscing, and
their tradeoff's, and th
e parallel psychology of d
readin
g an
d
remem
berin
g negative events have m
any
implications for m
arketin
g an
d
for op
timizin
g th
e pleasure of life.
Co
mfo
rts and Joys
Tibor S
citovsky (1992) draws a d
istinctio
n b
etween
what he calls com
forts and pleasures. (W
e thin
k joy is a b
etter wo
rd to 'describe his im
po
rtant
contrast, because it implies a sh
orter tim
e interval, and
we use jo
y to
substitute for pleasure.) In his view
, com
forts m
ake life easier, th
ey are like
good mattresses an
d air conditioning, an
d ice dispensers on refrigerators.
Joys are un
iqu
e events, such as a meal, a co
ncert, a m
eeting with
friends. H
e holds, we th
ink
with good reason, th
at comforts are subject to
majo
r ad
aptatio
n effects an
d are alm
ost invisible as part o
f remem
bered
pleasure. Joys, b
ecause they are unique events, are w
ell remem
bered
. Wh
en
we reflect o
n w
heth
er last year was g
oo
d o
r no
t, we do n
ot cite o
ur air
conditioning, mattress, or autom
atic g~rage d
oo
r opener. We th
ink
of th
e personal fam
ily events, the trips, the plays, m
ovies, concerts, spo
rt events, and so
forth. Am
ericans spend d
ispro
po
rtion
ately o
n com
forts com
pared
to th
e French (R
ozin et a!., 2009) and
presu
mab
ly do not h
arvest as m
uch
rem
emb
ered pleasure. T
his imp
ortan
t po
int relates to d
uratio
n neglect
and adap
tation
and
the idea that w
hat w
e remem
ber is events, preferably
events woven in
to a narrative.
We have
instan
tiated the
com
fort-jo
y d
istinctio
n w
ith its relation
ship to rem
emb
ered pleasure in a sim
ple choice paradigm. W
e ask people
whether, w
hen they
go to their favorite restauran
t, they order their favor
ite dish
or so
meth
ing
new (R
ozin et a!., 2009). We ask the sam
e qu
estion
ab
ou
t hearin
g th
eir favorite musical g
rou
p o
r traveling. If you op
t for yo
ur
favorite, you will probably have h
igh
er anticip
ation
and
a better experi
ence, bu
t you will add little to y
ou
r mem
ory
, since the mem
ory
is already
in place. T
he mem
ory
of eating th
e same foie g
ras recipe twice is ab
ou
t the
314 P
aul Rozin and Julia M
. Horm
es
same as th
at of eatin
g it once. B
ut if they op
t for the n
ew dish, although th
e an
ticipatio
n w
ill be less certain
ly positive an
d th
e exp
erience w
ill probably be less positive (th
ink
ing
in term
s of regression to th
e mean), a new
positive m
emo
ry w
ill have been
created (Rozin, H
ank
o, &
Gohar, in prepara
tion; Rozin et al., 2009).
Th
e Origin o
f Preferen
ces
Often, w
hen
a perso
n prefers object X
to Y (e.g., a fo
od
or m
usic), it is the
senso
ry properties th
at determ
ine the choice. T
hey like X m
ore th
an th
ey
like Y. L
ikings abo
ut food in
particu
lar are mo
stly ab
ou
t senso
ry m
atters. W
here do these sen
sory
-based
likings com
e from? W
e are remarkably
ign
oran
t in this area, abo
ut food, m
usic, spo
rts, spo
rt teams, clothing, o
r an
yth
ing
else. Psychologists have not b
een th
at interested
in this area o
f life, w
hich
is of fu
nd
amen
tal daily imp
ortan
ce and
a core issue for mar
keters and
econ
om
ists (for general reviews o
n th
e orig
in o
f food and
oth
er preferences, see B
irch, Fisher, an
d G
rimm
-Th
om
as [1996], Booth [1994],
and
Rozin [2006a, 2007a]).
In th
e food do
main
, as omnivorous an
imals, h
um
ans have a very open
end
ed attitu
de to
ward
foods and
principally acqu
ire mo
st of their food
likes and
dislikes un
der the heavy guidance o
f cultu
re. There appear to be
no
inn
ately negative o
r positive odors (Bartoshuk, 1990), b
ut there is an
in
nate aversion to irritan
t or extrem
e oral tem
peratu
re sensations, bitter, an
d reasonably stro
ng
sou
r or salty tastes. S
weetness is positive, for som
e, at an
y level, an
d for o
thers u
p to a high level, at w
hich
po
int it declines as
sweetness co
ntin
ues to rise (P
angborn, 1980). P
eople rarely come to dis
like sweets th
rou
gh
experience, bu
t they frequently com
e to like innately negative o
ral properties, such
as ice cold beverages, bitter foods or bever
ages (e.g., coffee), or irritan
t foods (e.g., foods season
ed w
ith chili pepper).
Ev
eryth
ing
we k
no
w suggests th
at this is a hed
on
ic reversal, that is, the sen
sory
inp
ut is u
nch
ang
ed, b
ut its valence inverts fro
m negative to positive.
We d
o n
ot k
no
w h
ow
this happens, but it is v
ery co
mm
on
(Rozin, 1990).
Three processes have been identified th
at can ch
ang
e the reaction to a
senso
ry experience. O
ne is m
ere exposure, wh
ich at m
od
est frequencies, ten
ds to en
han
ce likin
g (Z
ajonc, 1968). A seco
nd
is evaluative conditioning, th
e pairin
g o
f a relatively neutral senso
ry ex
perien
ce (say a mild odor)
with
an already positive (e.g., sw
eet) or negative (e.g., bitter) experience.
The co
mm
on
ph
eno
men
on
of acquired taste aversions, in
anim
als and
h
um
ans, is a result o
f evaluative con
ditio
nin
g an
d is easily d
emo
nstrated
Psych
olo
gy a
nd Sensory Marketing
, With a Fo
cus on Fo
od 3
15
in th
e laboratory as well as by q
uestio
nn
aire (Pelch
at & R
ozin, 1982). This
Pavlovian process h
as been
stud
ied ex
tensiv
ely in
the lab
orato
ry in an
im
als and
clearly pro
du
ces a change in lik
ing
for a taste or flavor stim
ulu
s. F
or hu
man
s, evaluative con
ditio
nin
g has b
een d
emo
nstrated
man
y times
in th
e laboratory, usu
ally in
the framew
ork
of in
creased liking b
y co
ntin
u
ed p
airing
of a n
eutral taste o
r situation with
an alread
y positive situ
ation
(D
e Houw
er, Th
om
as, & B
aeyens, 2001; Ro
zin, W
rzesnieswski, &
Byrnes,
1998). Alth
ou
gh
evaluative conditioning is surely
imp
ortan
t in real wo
rld
situations, it app
ears to be a rather fragile ph
eno
men
on
in the labo
ratory
(R
ozin et al., 1998). We d
o n
ot k
no
w w
hy. Th
e third
and
pro
bably m
ost
powerful force for creatin
g likes an
d d
islikes m
asqu
erades u
nd
er the general n
ame o
f "social influence." We do n
ot fu
lly u
nd
erstand
ho
w it w
ork
s, b
ut it is clear th
at un
der so
me conditions, th
e reaction
s of respected o
thers
to a food, piece of m
usic, or clothing can ch
ang
e ou
r likin
g for it (B
irch et al., 1996). A
dv
ertisers use all three o
f these p
athw
ays to induce lik
ing
for th
eir products. Bu
t like psychologists, they
do
no
t,kn
ow
ho
w to create lik
ings reliably. All th
ree meth
od
s can back
fire. T
here are two special m
echanisms th
at may
be involved
in the co
m
mo
n conversion o
f aversions into
preferen
ces by
hu
man
s. These reversals
(referred to above) include, on the sen
sory
side, co
min
g to like very co
ld
beverages, bitter o
r very
sou
r or salty tastes, a
nd
oral irritants. G
oin
g p
ast th
e sensory level, these include co
min
g to lik
e the experience o
f fear (e.g., in
roller coasters), d
isgu
st (e.g., in disg
ust h
um
or), an
d sadness (e.g., w
ith
sad m
usic or m
ovies). Since this seem
s to be a u
niq
ue h
um
an ex
perien
ce, th
e exp
lanatio
n m
igh
t be expected to inv
ok
e un
iqu
ely h
um
an processes.
Mere exposure an
d evaluative co
nd
ition
ing
are clearly present in an
imals.
Social influence h
as been dem
on
strated
in an
imals, b
ut is m
uch
mo
re pow
erful in hu
man
s. So one possibility, for sen
sory
or other reversals, is
the generally p
ow
erful effects o
f elders an
d p
eers du
ring
dev
elop
men
t and
in
adulthood. Pleasure experienced by o
thers in
con
sum
ptio
n of so
me
thin
g m
ay, perh
aps b
y a lin
k w
ith evaluative con
ditio
nin
g, induce p
references, an
d th
ere are a few d
emo
nstratio
ns o
f this (B
aeyens, Kaes, E
el en, &
S
ilverans, 1996). T
he seco
nd
m
echan
ism, w
hich w
e h
ave
called benign m
asoch
ism,
results from a u
niq
ue h
um
an en
joy
men
t of a
negative experience that
ou
r min
d k
no
ws is n
ot threatening. It is a m
atter of m
ind
ov
er body; we
enjoy irritant tastes o
r disgusting exp
eriences because they are negative,
ou
r body respo
nd
s as if they
are, bu
t we k
no
w b
etter than
ou
r body, and
this m
astery p
rod
uces pleasure. It is in
teresting
in th
is regard that w
e find
th
at for man
y ch
ili pep
per likers, th
eir favo
rite level of b
urn
is just belo
w
316 P
aul Rozin and ju
lia M
. Horm
es
the level they consider too pain
ful (R
ozin, 1990, 2007a; Rozin &
Schiller,
1980). Hu
man
s seem to enjoy p
ush
ing
the envelope o
fbearab
ility an
d get
ting
pleasure ou
t of it.
On
e can exam
ine sensory likings, as for food, from a developm
ental perspective. H
ere the question is wh
at are the relative roles of parents, peers, th
e m
edia, and
particular influential people in establishing likes and
dislikes? C
om
mo
n sense looks p
rimarily
to parents who contribute genes, predom
in
ant control over the en
viro
nm
ent for the first 5 years o
f life, and
substantial influence for the rest o
f child
ho
od
. It is thus sobering to realize that
with
in cultures, the correlation betw
een the food or m
usic likes of p
arents
and
those of th
eir adult children are very low, usually in th
e rang
e of .15 to
.30 (Rozin, 1991). V
alues, such as attitudes to abortion, show h
igh
er paren
tchild correlations. If the parents aren't the shaping force, w
hat is? P
eers are the m
ost likely principal source, alth
ou
gh
one study that directly tested this for fo
od
and
music preferences fo
un
d a surprisingly sm
all role for peers, either in
elementary school o
r college (Rozin, R
iklis, & M
argolis, 2004). We
can describe the current situation as th
e family and the p
eer paradox. T
here is on
e important fin
din
g in
this area that com
es ou
t of th
e mar
ketin
g literature an
d is n
ot w
idely kn
ow
n in
psychology. Ho
lbro
ok
and
S
chin
dler (1989)
have shown, p
articularly
for music, th
at exp
osu
re to m
usic styles (presumably p
eer related) du
ring
the ages of 15 an
d 30 is m
ost
influential in creating lifetime preferences. W
e have gath
ered su
pp
ortin
g
data for this point, for m
usic and
to som
e degree for food. It is notable that 15 to
30 years of age is a p
eriod
of p
eak p
eer influence. Som
ewhere in
ou
r 20s o
r 30s, mo
st Am
ericans settle do
wn
and
have families an
d w
ithd
raw
from
the intense peer activity an
d th
ose stro
ng
social influences that ch
aracterized
their adolescence an
d y
ou
ng
adu
lt years. This is a v
ery p
rom
ising
h
int ab
ou
t taste formation.
Som
e Reflections on S
ensory Ma
rketin
g from
the P
sychological P
erspective
So far as we can
tell, to a considerable degree, marketing is a b
ranch
of
psychology, bu
ilt principally on
prio
r research in social psychology and
the psychology o
f judgments an
d decision m
aking. Sen
sory
mark
eting
b
ring
s in ano
ther branch o
f psychology, nam
ely the study o
f sensatio
n an
d
perception. The psychology o
f sensation and
perception is pro
bab
ly the
mo
st adv
anced
and
"scientific" part o
f psychology. Historically, it has b
een
based prim
arily on the d
escriptio
n o
f basic phenomena an
d fu
nctio
nal
Psychology and S
ensory Ma
rketin
g, With
a Focus o
n F
ood 317
relations, such as the dark adaptation curv
e and
the laws o
f color mixing,
followed by sophisticated th
eory
and
experimentation. S
ocial psychology, in
con
trast, has accomplished m
uch
less than
sensation and
perception, at least p
artly because w
hat it is stud
yin
g is m
uch
mo
re complex an
d m
ultid
etermin
ed th
an th
e subject of sensation an
d p
erceptio
n. B
y its nature, it involves m
ore th
an one p
erson
and
often requires the consideration o
f context, w
hich, as we have discussed already, can
be extrem
ely difficult.
Perhaps because social psychology stands at the less acco
mp
lished
edge o
f psychology, it has the mo
st potential. There is m
ore to
find out. Bu
t it is also the m
ost insecure about its n
atural scientific status an
d has resp
on
ded
to
this by
the development o
f incredible sop
histicatio
n in
the design o
f ex
perim
ents an
d th
e use of sophisticated statistics to analyze th
e results. It is focused o
n th
e hypothesis-experiment m
odel of science. T
he art of
sophisticated experiment, in
clud
ing
pro
per controls, careful exploration
and
elimin
ation
of alternative explanations, an
d m
anip
ulatio
n checks, has
reached
a new h
igh
in the field. B
ut this has come at a price. U
nlik
e physics, chem
istry, biology, and
the psychology o
f se~sation and
perception, social psychology has p
aid little attention, an
d assigns little prestige, to
the first stages o
f science: accurate description of the social w
orld, the identi
fication of fu
nd
amen
tal invariances (either with
in o
r betw
een cultures),
and
the description of th
e fun
dam
ental functional relations in
the social
world (the equivalent o
f the dark
adap
tation
function, or B
oyle's law in
physics). It has focused on
the sophisticated testing o
f hy
po
theses w
ithout first identifying the fu
nd
amen
tal thin
gs th
at are to be ex
plain
ed. E
rving G
offm
an, am
on
g others, d
id this, just as D
arwin
did
it for som
e branches o
f biology (Haig, 2005; R
ozin, 2001, 2006b, 2007b). T
his critique of m
od
ern social psychology is n
ot o
rigin
al to us: it w
as stated
clearly in 1952 by the great social psychologist o
f the 2
0th
centu
ry
So
lom
on
Asch:
Before w
e inquire into origins and functional relations, it is necessary to know
the thing w
e are trying to explain. (A
sch, 1952, p. 65)
If there must be principles o
f scientific method
, then surely the first to claim
our attention is that one should describe pheJ)om
ena faithfully and
allow th
em to
guide the choice of problems an
d procedures. If social psychology is to
mak
e a contribution to hum
an knowledge, ifit is to d
o m
ore than
add footnotes to ideas developed in other fields, it m
ust look freely at its phenom
ena and exam
ine its
foundations. (Asch, 1952, p. xv)
Th
e resuJt of this focus o
n hypothesis testing has b
een great so
ph
istication
in
stud
yin
g th
e mechanism
s of lab
orato
ry findings. T
he findings may or
318 P
aul Rozin and julia M
. Ho
rme
s
may
not have gen
erality w
ithin
the laboratory (that is, they m
ay be fragile and dependent o
n a lim
ited selection o
f param
eters), and
they may o
r m
ay not m
ap on
to th
e real world. T
he result is that th
e great majority o
f experim
ents are do
ne o
n A
merican college stu
den
ts. No
doubt their visual system
s work in
the sam
e basic way as that o
f adu
lts arou
nd
the w
orld. But
their social w
orld, as they
enter this peculiar p
eriod
of life th
at is a transitio
n betw
een ho
me an
d in
dep
end
ent life, p
articularly
in the U
nited States,
is very different from
mo
st social worlds o
f oth
er hu
man
s (Arnett, 2008;
Rozin, 2001, 2006b). T
he A
merican
college un
derg
radu
ate is no
t as good a m
odel for Hom
o sapiens as the fruit fly or Escherichia coli is for genetics.
The
result is
that
the prem
ier journal in
the
field, the Journal
of
Personality and Social P
sychology (JPSP), is difficult to read and
is about narrow
ly defined labo
ratory
phenomena an
d th
e mech
anism
s or causes o
f them
. It is not abo
ut th
e ph
eno
men
a of the social world, an
d it is not about
the dom
ains oflife (R
ozin, 2007b). Sadly, in o
ur view
, mark
eting
, at least the p
art that is built on psy
chology, has ado
pted
the JP
SP
model, an
d th
is can b
e evidenced in its p
remier journals. W
e are hopeful that by integ
rating
the psychology o
f sensation an
d p
erceptio
n in
to m
arketing, senso
ry m
arketin
g w
ill also tu
rn o
ur atten
tion
mo
re to describing the basic ph
eno
men
a in the world
of m
arketing, as was tru
e in the history of sen
sation
and
perception. D
escription, generality, replicability, and
do
cum
entatio
n o
f functional relations should be cen
tral in th
e field. Show
ing that color m
atters in food selection is m
ore th
an d
oin
g an
experiment o
n th
e fact that color (often
represented by
two
different colors) influences foo
d choice in college stu
dents. W
e have to b
e very
careful not to mak
e the m
istake of finding a
repeatable labo
ratory
parad
igm
, dependent on
the selection o
f a particular set o
f param
eters from
a wide range o
f possibilities, and
analyzing it to death.
From
this perspective, it seems m
ost auspicious that sensory m
arketin
g brings to b
ear a great fu
nd
of know
ledge in sensation an
d percep
tion and
a set of m
etho
do
log
ies that are at once h
igh
ly sophisticated, often
quantitative, bu
t sou
nd
ly based o
n basic em
pirical relationships. In its his
tory, sensation and
percep
tion
went th
rou
gh
a perio
d w
hen the Gestalt
model, w
hich privileges context, played a central role. It w
as out of that
tradition that So
lom
on
Asch w
rote what w
e con
sider the great book o
f th
e field, Social Psychology (1952), w
hich is still very
mu
ch w
orth
reading. O
ur challenge in
mark
eting
and
in social psychology is to be as rigorous
as we can be, w
hile at the sam
e time keeping an
eye on
the real ~
odd. W
e m
ust carefully co
nsid
er wh
ether w
hat we are m
od
eling
in the laboratory
Psycho
log
y and Sensory M
arketing, With
a Focus on Food
319
is som
ethin
g th
at is ou
t there. Sim
plif;zing is a po
werfu
l tool and
the heart
of experim
entation. But too sim
ple bo
rders o
n th
e meaningless. S
tudying h
um
an responses to sugar in w
ater has limited
value, and studying frozen m
oments o
f hu
man
facial expressions, wh
ile very
imp
ortan
t and
productive, leaves o
ut m
uch
of w
hat goes on in th
e world.
References
Appadurai, A
. (1981). Gastro-politics in H
indu South A
sia. Am
erican Ethnologist,
8(3), 494-511. A
riely, D., &
Zauberm
an, G. {2000). O
n the making of an experience: The effects
of breaking and combining experiences in their overall evaluation. Journal o
f B
ehavioral Decision M
aking, 13(2), 21
9-2
32
. A
rnett, J. J. {2008). T
he neglected 95%
: W
hy Am
erican psychology needs to becom
e less Am
erican. Am
erican Psychologist, 63, 602-614.
Asch, S. {1952). Social psychology. N
ew Y
ork: PrenticeJ-lall.
Baeyens, F., K
aes, B., E
elen, P., & Silverans, P. {1996). O
bservational evaluative conditioning of an em
bedded stimulus elem
ent. European Journal o
f Social P
sychology, 26, 15-28. B
artoshuk, L. M. {1990). D
istinctions between taste and sm
ell relevant to the role
of experience. In E. D. C
apaldi & T. L. Pow
ley (Eds.), Taste, experience and
feeding (pp. 62-72). Washington, D
C: A
merican Psychological A
ssociation.
Birch, L. L
., Fisher, J. 0
., & G
rimm
-Thom
as, K.
(1996). The development o
f children's eating habits. In H
. L.
Meiselm
an &
H. J. H
. MacFie (E
ds.), F
ood choice, acceptance and consumption (pp.
161-206). London: B
lackie A
cademic and Professional.
Booth, D
. A. (1994). P
sychology of nutrition. L
ondon: Taylor and Francis.
De H
ouwer, J., T
homas, S., &
Baeyens, F. {200 1). A
ssociation learning of likes and dislikes: A
review of 25 years of research on hum
an evaluative conditioning. P
sychological Bulletin, 127(6), 853-869.
Fredrickson, B. {2000). Extracting m
eaning from past affective experiences: T
he im
portance of peaks, ends, and specific emotions. C
ognition an
d E
motion,
14, 577-606. Fredrickson, B. L., &
Kahnem
an, D. (1993). D
uration neglect in retrospective evaluations of affective episodes. Journal o
f Personality and Social P
sychology, 65, 44-55.
Haig,
B. D
. {2005).
An
abductive theory of scientific m
ethod. P
sychological M
ethods, 10, 371-388. H
olbrook, M. B
., & Schindler, R
. M. {1989). Som
e exploratory findings on the developm
ent of musical tastes. Journal o
f Consum
er Research, 16, 119-124. H
yde, R. J., & W
itherly, S. A. ( 1993). D
ynamic contrast: A
sensory contribution to
palatability. Appetite, 21, 1-
16.
320 Paul R
ozin and julia M. H
ormes
Kahnem
an, D., F
redrickson, B. L., S
chreiber, C. A
., & R
edelmeier, D
. A. {1993).
Wh
en m
ore pain is preferred
to less: Adding a b
etter end. Psychological
Science, 4, 401-405. K
ahneman, D
., & Snell, J. (1992). P
redicting a changing taste: Do
people know
wh
at they will like? Journal o
f Behavioral D
ecision Making, 5, 187-200.
Kahnem
an, D., W
akker, P. P., & S
arin, R. ( 1997). Back to B
enth
am? E
xplorations of
experienced utility. Quarterly Journal o
f Econom
ics, 11
2,3
75
-40
5.
Kass, L. ( 1994). The hungry soul: E
ating and the perfecting of our nature. C
hicago: U
niversity of C
hicago Press.
Larson-P
owers, N
., & P
angborn, R. M
. (2006). Paired com
parison and
time-intensity
measurem
ents of the sen
sory
properties of beverages an
d gelatins containing
sucrose or synthetic sweeteners. Journal o
f Food Science, 43(1 ), 41-46. L
oewenstein, G
., & F
rederick, S. (1997). P
redicting reactions to environmental
change. In M.
H. B
azerman
(Ed.), E
nvironment,
ethics, and behavior (pp.
52-72). Lanham
, MD
: Lexington B
ooks. M
eiselman, H
. (Ed.). (2000). D
imensions o
f the meal: The science, culture, business,
and art of eating. G
aithersburg, MD
: Aspen P
ublishers. P
angborn, R. M
. (1980). A critical analysis o
f sensory responses to sweetness. In
P. Koivistoinen &
L. Hy
vo
nen
(Eds.), C
arbohydrate sweeteners in foods and
nutrition (pp. 87-110). Lo
nd
on
: Academ
ic Press. P
elchat, M. L., &
Rozin, P. (1982). T
he special role of nausea in th
e acquisition of
food dislikes by humans. A
ppetite, 3, 341-351. P
liner, P., & R
ozin, P. (2000). Th
e psychology of the m
eal. In H
. Meiselm
an (Ed.),
Dim
ensions of the meal: The science, cultu1·e, business, and art o
f eating (pp. 19-46). G
aithersburg, MD
: Aspen P
ublishers. R
ode, E., R
ozin, P., & D
urlach, P. (2007). Experienced and rem
emb
ered pleasure for
meals: D
uration neglect bu
t minim
al peak-end effects. Appetite, 49, 18-29.
Rozin, E
. ( 1982). The stru
cture o
f cuisine. In L. M. B
arker (Ed.), The psychobiology
of hum
an food selection (pp. 189-203). Westport, C
T: A
VI.
Rozin,
E. (1983).
Ethnic
cuisine: The flavor
principle cookbook.
New
Y
ork: H
awth
orn
Books.
Rozin, P. (1990). G
etting to like the b
urn
of chili pepper: B
iological, psychological an
d cultural perspectives. In
B. G
. Green, J. R. M
ason, & M
. R. K
are (Eds.),
Chem
ical senses, Vol. 2: Irritation (pp. 231-269). N
ew Y
ork: Marcel D
ekker. R
ozin, P. (1991). Fam
ily resemblance in food an
d other d
om
ains: T
he family para
dox and the role of p
arental congruence. A
ppetite, 16, 93
-10
2.
Rozin, P. (1999). P
readaptation and
the puzzles and pro
perties o
f pleasure. In D.
Kahnem
an, E. Diener, &
N. S
chwarz (E
ds.), Well being: The foundations of
hedonic psychology (pp. 1 09
-13
3). N
ew Y
ork: Russell S
age. R
ozin, P. (2001). Social psychology an
d science: S
ome lessons from
Solom
on Asch.
Personality and Social P
sychology Review
, 5, 2-14. R
ozin, P. (2006a). Food choice: A
n introduction. In L. J.
Frew
er & H
. van Trijp
(Eds.). U
nderstanding consumers of food products (pp. 3
-29
). Cam
bridge, UK
: W
oodhead.
Psycholog
y and Sensory Marketing, W
ith a Focus on Food
321
Rozin
, P. (2006b). Do
main
denigration and
pro
cess preference in academic psy
chology. Perspectives on P
sychological Science, 1, 36
5-3
76
. R
ozin, P. (2007a). Food an
d eating. In S. K
itayam
a & D
. Co
hen
(Eds.), H
andbook o
f cultural psychology (pp. 391-416). New
York: G
uilford. R
ozin, P. (2007b). E
xploring the landscape of m
od
ern
academic
psychology: F
inding and filling the holes. Am
erican Psychologist, 62, 754-766.
Rozin, A
., Guillot, L., &
Rozin
, P. (2007). Mem
ory for the attributes (liking, happy, sad) for
three-piece concerts:
Distortions
and accuracies.
Manuscript
in
preparation. R
ozin, P., Hanko, K
., & G
ohar, D. (2009). Individual differences in the im
portance o
f experienced, remem
bered and anticipated pleasure across different domains
of life. M
anuscript in preparation.
Rozin, P., H
ank
o, K., &
Durlach, P. (2006). S
elf-prediction of hedonic trajecto
ries for repeated use o
f bo
dy
pro
du
cts and
foods: Po
or perform
ance, no
t im
proved by a full generation of experience. A
ppetite, 46, 297-303. R
ozin, P ., Rem
ick, A. R
., & F
ischler, C. (2009). B
road themes o
f difference between
French and A
mericans in attitudes to food and pleasure: Individualized vs col
lective values, abundance vs moderation, quantity vs quality, and com
forts vs joys. S
ubmitted m
anuscript. R
ozin, P., Riklis, J., &
Margolis, L. (2004). M
utu
al exposure or close peer relation
ships do no
t seem to
foster increased similarity
in food, music or television
program preferences. A
ppetite, 42, 41
-48
. R
ozin, A., R
ozin, P., &
Goldberg, E. (2004). T
he feeling o
f music past: H
ow
listeners rem
ember m
usical affect. Music P
erception, 22, 15
-39
. R
ozin, P., & S
chiller, D. ( 1980). T
he nature and
acquisition of a preference for chili
pep
per by hum
ans. Motivation and E
motion, 4, 7
7-1
01
. R
ozin, P., & T
aylor, S. (2006). Determ
inants of rem
embered pleasure after experienc
ing an art exhibit w
ith rooms devoted to three different artists. M
anuscript in
preparation. R
ozin, P., Wrzesniew
ski, A., &
Byrnes, D
. (1998). T
he elusiveness of evaluative
conditioning. Learning & M
otivation, 29, 39
7-4
15
. S
chutz, H. G
. (1989). Beyond preference: A
pp
rop
riateness as a m
easure of contex
tual acceptance of food
. In D. M
. H. T
ho
mso
n (E
d.), Food acceptability (pp. 115-134). E
ssex, Eng.: E
lsevier Applied S
cience Publishers.
Scitovsky, T. (1992). The joyless economy. O
xfo
rd, U
K: O
xfo
rd U
niversity Press. W
ansink. B., P
ayne, C. R
., & N
orth, J. (2007). Fin
e as No
rth D
akota wine: S
ensory expectations an
d th
e intake of com
pan
ion
foods. Physiology and B
ehavior, 9
0,7
12
-71
6.
Wrzesniew
ski, A., M
cCauley, C
. R., &
Rozin, P. (1999). O
do
r and affect: Individual differences in the im
pact of o
do
r on
liking for places, things and
people.
Chem
ical Senses, 24, 713-721. Z
ajonc, R. B
. (1968). Attitudinal effects""o
f mere exposure. Journal of P
ersonality and Social P
sychology. 9, 1-27.
