Two basic food trends are worth mentioning here:

responsibility and authenticity [15]. The responsibility trend implies that consumers are increasingly under pressure to take responsibility for the consequences of their food choices. This includes consequences for themselves, most notably for their own health, and consequences for society at large, mainly because of the impact of consumer choice on more and less sustainable food production. Consumer health interest has been underway for quite some years and the effect of health information on products has received considerable research attention 16, 17•, 18, 19 and 20, whereas sustainable food production is, at least from a consumer perspective, a new topic, which nevertheless

is expected to become more prominent as public pressure for more sustainable choices increases [21]. Responsibility is a worldwide trend that click here has resulted in the launch of many new food products claimed to be healthy, ethical, environmentally friendly [22•]. The authenticity trend describes the increasing consumer interest in food products that are natural, unspoiled, local, traditional, have a low degree of processing or in other ways are regarded as ‘the real thing’ 23• and 24. Authenticity is another worldwide trend that has given rise to food products promoted as local, regional, of special qualities, natural, without additives etc. Responsibility and authenticity differ from the more traditional food qualities and especially Gemcitabine research buy from sensory qualities in that they cannot be experienced — they are credence qualities that need to be communicated 25•• and 26. And communication has not only the role to create expectations that then can be confirmed or disconfirmed by experience — communication needs to continue after purchase and throughout consumption if consumer beliefs

Mannose-binding protein-associated serine protease in a product promoted as responsible and authentic are to be upheld. The development sketched in the preceding paragraph is important for the division of labour between consumer science and sensory science. With a traditional view of food quality — encompassing mainly sensory characteristics and perhaps convenience — we have a neat distinction between pre-purchase and post-purchase [26]. The pre-purchase phase, leading to consumer choice, can be explained by the effects of communication and previous experience, and can be studied by the paper-and-pencil methods commonly used in consumer science. In the post-purchase phase, the consumption and the sensory impressions following with it are central, and can be studied using the toolbox of sensory science. But now, this distinction no longer holds. Communication is important throughout, as it not only creates expectations with regard to the sensory experience, but creates also impressions with regard to responsibility and authenticity, and these impressions need to be upheld throughout preparation and consumption.