consumer attitudes towards improved products: an elm approach

W a g e n i n g e n U n i v e r s i t y

Author: Supervisor:

Joris Barbier 941218034120 Arnout Fischer

Date:

08-07-2016

Consumer attitudes towards improved products: an

ELM approach

YSS 82312

12 ECTS

2

Abstract Innovation is an ongoing process in almost every industry and in most cases necessary for survival. However, new product development isn’t always an instant success and failure rates are, despite years of research, very high. As attitudes are important determinants of behavior, research on attitudes can provide useful information on how to improve intentions for buying behavior. Whereas earlier studies focused on attitudes towards entirely new products, this study examines the fit between the information given and the type of information processing (central or peripheral) on attitudes towards improved products. In an experiment, an extra attribute was added to an existing product, presented with either a negative or a positive cue. Attitudes towards these and the original version of the product were measured after respondents had to perform a depletion task. These results were compared to respondents in the non-depletion (central processing) condition. Contrary to expectations, the attitude towards the original product was highest in both conditions and no significant differences in attitudes were found between the depletion and non-depletion condition.

3

Table of Contents Abstract ................................................................................................................................. 2

Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 4

Theoretical framework ........................................................................................................... 5

Attitude .............................................................................................................................. 5

Elaboration Likelihood Model ............................................................................................. 5

Product .............................................................................................................................. 6

New attribute...................................................................................................................... 6

Hypotheses ........................................................................................................................ 6

Method .................................................................................................................................. 8

Design ............................................................................................................................... 8

Manipulations..................................................................................................................... 8

Measures ........................................................................................................................... 8

Procedure .......................................................................................................................... 9

Data analysis ....................................................................................................................10

Results .................................................................................................................................11

Research population .........................................................................................................11

Manipulation check ...........................................................................................................11

Testing hypotheses ...........................................................................................................11

Discussion and conclusion ...................................................................................................13

References ...........................................................................................................................14

Appendix 1 - Qualtrics survey ...............................................................................................17

4

Introduction In order for consumers to make a choice between alternative products or services, information about the set of alternatives is prerequisite. Insufficient information could lead to consumer ignorance with regard to the available options (Falkinger, 2008). However, information “consumes the attention of its recipients. Hence a wealth of information creates a poverty of attention” (Simon, 1971, p. 40). So decision quality increases as the amount of information increases until a critical point, after which the decision quality sharply decreases (Sicilia and Ruiz, 2010). To deal with this, consumers use all kinds of heuristics when making decisions (Tversky and Kahneman, 1974). Kahneman (2003) made the distinction between intuitive and rational decisions, system 1 and system 2 respectively. System 1 provides fast and effortless decisions, whereas decisions made by system 2 are slow and effortful. Decisions made under pressure of stimuli and time constraints are mainly the result of system 1 thinking and use of heuristics (Samson and Voyer, 2014). This is no problem for consumers when buying daily groceries, in fact, they save time and effort. These habits with regard to purchase decisions only become a problem when encountering a new product. New product development can be very tough for firms, and the failure rates of new products are, despite years of research, still very high (e.g. Nijssen & Frambach, 2000; Van Trijp & Van Kleef, 2008). Consumer attitudes are important determinants for the intention of (buying) behavior (e.g. Wilcock et al, 2004; Patch et al, 2005). Earlier research on consumer attitudes and product adoption focused on entirely new products (e.g. Wang, Dou and Zhou, 2008; Lee, 2014), but none have looked into improved products so far. This research focusses on the effect of the consumer information processing strategy on the attitude towards a product with a new attribute, using the Elaboration Likelihood Model. By studying literature and performing an experiment in which respondents are manipulated to use a predetermined processing model, an answer to the following research question will be sought;

What is the fit between the information given and the type of information processing by consumers on the attitude towards improved products?

By better understanding if and how different information processing models lead to different attitudes, firms could trigger the most favorable processing system to increase sales for their improved products.

5

Theoretical framework

Attitude

There are many different scientific definitions of the term attitude, all largely the same with only subtle differences. In this research, attitude is defined as a relatively permanent and stable summary of evaluations and feelings people hold in regard to themselves, other people, objects, and issues. (Petty and Cacioppo, 1986; Wilcock et al, 2004; Jokšaitė, Banytė, and Virvilaitė, 2007). Ajzen (1991) constructed the following equation, in which a person’s attitude (A) is directly proportional ( ) to the sum of the strength of each salient belief (b) multiplied by the subjective evaluation (e) of the beliefs attribute for the number of n salient beliefs:

(Ajzen, 1991)

For this research, only individual’s attitudes towards products matter, so personal characteristics will not be taken into account.

Elaboration Likelihood Model

The Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM) was first introduced by Petty and Cacioppo in 1981, and implies that there are two different ways for processing information. These ways are called routes, as a metaphor for the route a thought makes in the mind. ELM makes the distinction between central and peripheral ways of thinking. The central processing route is comparable with system 2 thinking, just as the peripheral processing route is comparable with system 1 thinking. The central route is effortful and requires “motivation and the ability to scrutinize issue-relevant arguments” (Petty and Cacioppo, 1986), whereas the peripheral route processes information much quicker and costs much less effort. Hence it follows that an attitude change induced by central route processing requires substantially more cognitive effort than an attitude change induced by peripheral route processing. This means that a change in attitude induced by central route processing is more enduring than a change induced by using the peripheral route (Cialdini, Petty and Cacioppo, 1981). Motivation is one of the two key factors determining the information process strategy. When highly motivated, the central route processing is most favorable. The degree of motivation depends on the level of involvement. When an issue or object is personally relevant for an individual, this results in a high level of involvement, leading to high motivation (Perloff, 2014). On the contrary, when an issue or object is not personally relevant, paying much attention and weighing all arguments is not worth the effort, so with low involvement, the peripheral route is favorable (e.g. Petty, Cacioppo and Goldman, 1981; Perloff, 2014). Need for cognition is, besides the level of involvement, another important factor regarding the motivation of individuals. People with a high need for cognition (NFC) have a high tendency to “engage in and enjoy effortful cognitive activity” (Cacioppo et al., 1996, p. 198), and are therefore more susceptible for central cues and strong arguments. People with a low NFC are more susceptible for peripheral cues (Perloff, 2014). Ability is the second key factor determining the process strategy of information. Besides the willingness to think thoroughly, an individual needs to have the cognitive ability to process all information (Perloff, 2014). In a situation where an individual is exposed to a lot of distractions and stimuli, or is mentally exhausted from earlier cognitive tasks, the ability to process centrally is limited, and this person will rely on heuristics and peripheral cues (Chaiken and Trope, 1999; Shiv and Fedorikhin, 1999; Perloff, 2014).

6

Product High familiarity and expertise concerning a product results in product knowledge (Wang et al., 2008), which leads to more accessible consumer attitudes and better associations with behavior (Fazio and Zanna, 1981; Millar and Millar, 1996; Argyriou and Melewar, 2011). As this research focusses on attitudes towards improved products, an extra attribute will be added to an original product. The attitude towards the existing product will be the baseline, to which the attitude towards the product with a new attribute will be compared. A suitable example of a highly familiar product is chocolate sprinkles, a typically Dutch type of sandwich toppings.

New attribute

New attributes are likely to improve the overall product evaluation, as consumers perceive these attributes as additional benefits provided by the producer (Mukherjee and Hoyer, 2001). This leads to two assumptions. First, the new attribute comes with the information that it improves the overall quality of the product. This requires actively thinking about the attribute and linking it to the product characteristics, and therefore implies central processing. This suggests that the content of the cue with which the new attribute is presented determines the direction of the attitude change when processing centrally; a cue with a positive message (e.g. a new recipe/formula) will increase the overall attitude, and a cue with a negative message (e.g. legally adequate warnings) will decrease the overall attitude. Second, the mere presence of the attribute is perceived as beneficial (Carpenter et al., 1994). This is an heuristic, and therefore implies peripheral processing. While not being able to identify the attribute as positive or negative, the consumer just assumes its presence is advantageous. This suggests that the mere presence of an extra attribute leads to a more positive overall attitude, regardless of the content of the cue with which the attribute is presented. Whether the information about the new attribute is processed centrally or peripherally is dependent on the motivation and ability of the consumer. When motivated and cognitive capable, consumers will process the information centrally. If not motivated and/or cognitive capable, consumers will process the information peripherally. When cognitive resources are depleted, we expect the peripheral information processing strategy to be dominant.

Hypotheses In accordance with the theory above, the following hypotheses are constructed:

H1 Consumer attitudes towards a product with a new attribute will shift in the direction of the cue with which the new attribute is presented when processing centrally.

H2 Consumer attitudes towards a product with a new attribute will be higher than the attitude towards the original product when processing peripherally, regardless of the way of presentation

The hypotheses are visualized in the model below.

7

Figure 1 Conceptual model

8

Method

Design The hypotheses are tested through an experiment, which is conducted with an online survey using the survey software Qualtrics. As chocolate sprinkles are typically Dutch, only Dutch people could participate. There are no further requirements for participants, so a convenience sample is used. In order to test all hypotheses, the experiment consists of six different conditions measuring the attitude towards chocolate sprinkles, using a 2x3 design where two factors are manipulated: processing strategy (central or peripheral) and the new attribute (no new attribute, negative cue or positive cue). The research design is visualized in table 1. Table 1 Research Design

Route

Central Peripheral

Negative C- P-

Cue No cue (baseline) Co Po

Positive C+ P+

Manipulations

The manipulations for peripheral processing consists of mental fatigue. This is ensured by depletion in form of a writing assignment, which was proven to be successful in earlier research (Scheimel, 2007; Scheimel and Vohs, 2009; Kostek and Ashrafioun, 2014). Participants wrote a short story about their last trip abroad, using 100 to 150 words1. Participants assigned to the peripheral were prohibited to use the letters a and r2. Participants assigned to the central processing condition were free to use all letters. The writing assignment with restrictions is far more difficult than the one without restrictions, creating two groups of participants based on mental exhaustion. The new and meaningless attribute for chocolate sprinkles is ‘XPO’. These three letters were randomly chosen, and do not mean anything in this context. Preliminary research confirmed that the positive and negative cues were indeed perceived as such. See the appendix for the full images of the product and cues.

Measures Participants’ attitudes were measured with four statements using a seven-point Likert scale. The statements are conducted from Ajzen’s sample TPB questionnaire and adjusted to fit this research, e.g. ‘I think these chocolate sprinkles are distasteful/tasteful’, or ‘a sandwich with these chocolate sprinkles is pleasant/unpleasant’. As only Dutch people were able to participate, the complete survey and statements were in Dutch.

1 Due to comments of respondents on counting words, the instructions for the length of the writing

assignment were changed to three to five lines. This is on average less than the original 100 to 150 words, but the change had no impact on the actual length of respondents’ writings. 2 The forbidden letters were different than in the original writing assignment by Scheimel. This is due to

the fact that this assignment is in Dutch, and the original was in English. The letters are equally frequently used in both languages, so this writing assignment should be just as difficult as the original (Cornell Department of Mathematics, 2004; Genootschap Onze Taal, 2011).

9

The survey ends with general questions regarding chocolate sprinkles (‘What type of chocolate sprinkles do you eat most?’, ‘How often do you eat chocolate sprinkles?’) and two demographic questions about age and gender of the respondent.

Procedure

After agreeing with the informed consent, participants were randomly assigned to the non-depletion (writing assignment without letter restrictions) or depletion (writing assignment with letter restrictions) task, respectively central and peripheral processing condition. Performing the depletion task is very challenging, so a high dropout rate for this condition is expected. To compensate for this, the distribution ratio of respondents into depletion and non-depletion will be 2:13. In order to prevent respondents from skipping the depletion task, the button for going to the next question is only displayed after 60 seconds. Furthermore, a minimum of 50 characters is required. To check whether the manipulation has worked, the time spent on the writing task will be measured for both conditions. Right after the writing assignment, a second randomization took place, presenting the participants with either the original chocolate sprinkles package, the package with the extra attribute presented negatively or the package with the extra attribute presented positively. The statements used for measuring the attitude were the same for all three different product versions. After the attitude measurement, the respondents were presented with a list of general questions regarding chocolate sprinkles and some questions about their demographics. To make sure participants didn’t link the depletion task to the actual goal of this research, participants needed to tell what they think the goal of this survey was. The procedure is visualized in the figure below.

Figure 2 Flowchart

3 After intermediate evaluation, the ratio is set back to 1:1.

10

Data analysis Gathered data was analyzed using SPSS software. First, Cronbach’s alpha was used to measure the internal consistency for the attitude measurement statements. Whether the manipulation had worked was checked with a t-test. A factorial ANOVA is used to compare the attitude means.

11

Results

Research population

Contrary to prior expectations, the dropout rate in the condition of non-depletion was higher than in the condition of depletion. Overall, the dropout rate was 52%. In order to increase the chance on significant results, the survey was also distributed to non-students. From the 263 people who started the survey, 123 completed it. People who made no effort to follow the rules of the depletion task are left out. The same goes for people who recognized the depletion task as such and linked it to the actual goal of the survey, as they might damage the internal validity. After removal, the data of 120 respondents is analyzed. Among the 120 respondents who completed the survey, 93 are female and 27 male. The average age of the respondents is 38.8 years (std. deviation 17.729). The value of Cronbach’s alpha for the four attitude measurement statements is 0.924, which means that the state of internal consistency is very high among these statements, and using the average of these statements for attitude measurement is therefore justified.

Manipulation check

When taking a look at the mean times respondents needed to complete the writing assignment, performing the depletion task took respondents on average 546 seconds, whereas the non-depletion task only took 275 seconds to fulfill, t(115) = -4.749, p < 0.00. Thus we conclude the manipulation was successful.

Testing hypotheses

Factorial ANOVA was used to test the effect of the addition of the extra attribute on the attitude towards chocolate sprinkles, the effect the depletion task had on the attitude towards chocolate sprinkles and the interaction effect between depletion and the extra attribute on the attitude towards chocolate sprinkles. The addition of the attribute had a main effect F(2,114) = 16.258, p<0.00. The depletion and the interaction between depletion and the extra attribute had no significant effect: F(1,114) = 0.156, p=0.694 and F(2,114) = 0.035, p=0.966 respectively.

Overall, the attitude towards chocolate sprinkles was rated higher for the neutral package than for either packages with the extra attribute. This is illustrated in the table and bar chart below.

Table 2 Attitude means

Mean Std. deviation

Negative cue Non-depletion 4.059 0.347

Depletion 3.920 0.305

Baseline Non-depletion 5.700 0.286


Positive cue Non-depletion 4.339 0.382


12

Figure 3 Attitude means visualized

These results do not support H1 and H2. Furthermore, there were no significant differences between different ages or male and female respondents.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Negative cue

Baseline Positive cue

Att

itu

de

Non-depletion

Depletion

13

Discussion and conclusion

The aim of this research was to investigate the fit between information given and the type of processing on the attitude towards improved products. Hypothesis 1 assumed that the attitude towards chocolate sprinkles would shift in the direction of the cue with which the extra attribute was presented when processing centrally. Hypothesis 2 assumed that the attitude towards both conditions with the extra attribute would be more positive than the baseline when processing peripherally. The results of the factorial ANOVA did not provide evidence for either hypothesis. According to the test results, there are no significant differences in the attitudes between the depletion and the non-depletion condition, and in both conditions is the attitude towards the neutral package highest. There are a few possible explanations for these findings. Previous studies which used this depletion task (Scheimel, 2007; Scheimel and Vohs, 2009; Kostek and Ashrafioun, 2014) had their respondents write the assignment under personal supervision of an experimenter who read the instructions out loud. This may have caused the respondents to put more effort in the writing assignment, leading to more depletion. However, when taking a look at the average time spent for the non-depletion and the depletion conditions in the writing assignment, it can be concluded that the manipulation was successful: respondents in the depletion condition used nearly twice as much time to write about their last visit abroad. A second possible explanation for the similarity in the results between the depletion and non-depletion condition is that heuristics were dominant in both conditions, meaning respondents in both conditions used the peripheral processing strategy. The product used in this experiment, chocolate sprinkles, might be too habitual to induce a high level of involvement, which is prerequisite for high motivation, hence also for the central processing strategy (Perloff, 2014). Furthermore, the distinction between the negative and positive cue was mainly based on color. The colors of the letters on the packaging presenting the new attribute were red and green respectively. These colors are known to be associated with negative and positive content, and can act as “implicit affective cue” (Friedman and Förster 2010; Elliot and Maier, 2014). Finally, the new attribute XPO might have been perceived as high tech additive. This could explain the dislike towards our ‘improved product’, because consumers show general wariness towards novel food technologies (e.g. Cox, Evans and Lease, 2007; Siegrist, 2007). This research only tested positive and negative cues of a fictitious meaningless attribute. Whether the results of this study also apply to other (food) products and with other (more factual and realistic) attributes and neutral cues needs to be pointed out in future research. In order to account for food related techno- and neophobia, we suggest the use of an acknowledged measurement scale, e.g. the food technology neophobia scale (Cox and Evans, 2008).

14

References Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational behavior and human decision processes, 50(2), 179-211. Ajzen, I. Sample TPB Questionnaire. Retrieved on 22.11.2015 from http://people.umass.edu/aizen/pdf/tpb.questionnaire.pdf Argyriou, E., & Melewar, T. C. (2011). Consumer attitudes revisited: A review of attitude theory in marketing research. International Journal of Management Reviews, 13(4), 431-451. Cacioppo, J. T., Petty, R. E., Feinstein, J. A., & Jarvis, W. B. G. (1996). Dispositional differences in cognitive motivation: The life and times of individuals varying in need for cognition. Psychological bulletin, 119(2), 197. Carpenter, G. S., Glazer, R., & Nakamoto, K. (1994). Meaningful brands from meaningless differentiation: The dependence on irrelevant attributes. Journal of Marketing Research, 339-350. Cialdini, R. B., Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1981). Attitude and attitude change. Annual review of psychology, 32(1), 357-404. Chaiken, S., & Trope, Y. (Eds.). (1999). Dual-process theories in social psychology. New York: Guilford Press. Cornell Department of Mathematics (2004). English letter frequency. Retrieved on 28.11.2015 from http://www.math.cornell.edu/~mec/2003-2004/cryptography/subs/frequencies.html Cox, D. N., Evans, G., & Lease, H. J. (2007). The influence of information and beliefs about technology on the acceptance of novel food technologies: A conjoint study of farmed prawn concepts. Food Quality and Preference, 18(5), 813-823. Cox, D. N., & Evans, G. (2008). Construction and validation of a psychometric scale to measure consumers’ fears of novel food technologies: The food technology neophobia scale. Food quality and preference, 19(8), 704-710. Elliot, A. J., & Maier, M. A. (2014). Color psychology: Effects of perceiving color on psychological functioning in humans. Annual review of psychology, 65, 95-120. Falkinger, J. (2008). Limited Attention as a Scarce Resource in Information‐Rich Economies. The Economic Journal, 118(532), 1596-1620. Fazio, R. H., & Zanna, M. P. (1981). Direct experience and attitude-behavior consistency. Advances in experimental social psychology, 14, 161-202. Friedman, R. S., & Förster, J. (2010). Implicit affective cues and attentional tuning: an integrative review. Psychological bulletin, 136(5), 875. Genootschap Onze Taal (2011). Letterfrequentie in het Nederlands. Retrieved on 28.11.2015 from https://onzetaal.nl/taaladvies/advies/letterfrequentie-in-het-nederlands Jokšaitė, E., Banytė, J., & Virvilaitė, R. (2007). Relationship of consumer attitude and brand: emotional aspect. Engineering economics, (2 (52), 65-77.

http://people.umass.edu/aizen/pdf/tpb.questionnaire.pdf

http://www.math.cornell.edu/~mec/2003-2004/cryptography/subs/frequencies.html

15

Kacen, J. J., & Lee, J. A. (2002). The influence of culture on consumer impulsive buying behavior. Journal of consumer psychology, 12(2), 163-176. Kahneman, D. (2003). Maps of bounded rationality: Psychology for behavioral economics. The American economic review, 93(5), 1449-1475. Kostek, J., & Ashrafioun, L. (2014). Tired winners: The effects of cognitive resources and prior winning on risky decision making. Journal of Gambling Studies, 30(2), 423-434. Lee, B. C. (2014) Critical decisions in new product launch: pricing and advertising strategies on consumer adoption of green product innovation. Asian Journal of Technology Innovation, 22(1), 16-32. Masouleh, S., Pazhang, M., & Moradi, J. (2012). What is Impulse Buying? An analytical network processing framework for prioritizing factors affecting impulse buying. Management Science Letters, 2(4), 1053-1064. Millar, M. G., & Millar, K. U. (1996). The effects of direct and indirect experience on affective and cognitive responses and the attitude–behavior relation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 32(6), 561-579. Miller, G. A. (1956). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological review, 63(2), 81. Mukherjee, A., & Hoyer, W. D. (2001). The effect of novel attributes on product evaluation. Journal of Consumer Research, 28(3), 462-472. Nijssen, E. J., & Frambach, R. T. (2000). Determinants of the adoption of new product development tools by industrial firms. Industrial Marketing Management, 29(2), 121-131. Petty, R. E., Cacioppo, J. T., & Goldman, R. (1981). Personal involvement as a determinant of argument-based persuasion. Journal of personality and social psychology, 41(5), 847. Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion (pp. 1-24). Springer New York. Perloff, R. M. (2013). The Dynamics Of Persuasion: Communication And Attitudes In The Twenty-first Century. Author: Richard M. Perloff, Publisher. Reyna, V. F. (2004). How people make decisions that involve risk a dual-processes approach. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 13(2), 60-66. Samson, A., & Voyer, B. G. (2014). Emergency purchasing situations: Implications for consumer decision-making. Journal of Economic Psychology, 44, 21-33. Schmeichel, B. J. (2007). Attention control, memory updating, and emotion regulation temporarily reduce the capacity for executive control. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 136(2), 241. Schmeichel, B. J., & Vohs, K. (2009). Self-affirmation and self-control: affirming core values counteracts ego depletion. Journal of personality and social psychology, 96(4), 770. Sicilia, M., & Ruiz, S. (2010). The effects of the amount of information on cognitive responses in online purchasing tasks. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 9(2), 183-191.

16

Siegrist, M. (2007). Consumer attitudes to food innovation and technology. In L. Frewer & H. van Trijp (Eds.), Understanding consumers of food products. Cambridge: Woodhead Publishing. Simon, H. A. (1971). Designing organizations for an information-rich world. Computers, communication, and the public interest, 37, 40-41. Shiv, B., & Fedorikhin, A. (1999). Heart and mind in conflict: The interplay of affect and cognition in consumer decision making. Journal of consumer Research, 26(3), 278-292. Strack, F., & Deutsch, R. (2006). Reflective and impulsive determinants of consumer behavior. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 16(3), 205-216. Van Trijp, H. C., & Van Kleef, E. (2008). Newness, value and new product performance. Trends in Food Science & Technology, 19(11), 562-573. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. science, 185(4157), 1124-1131. Wang, G., Dou, W., & Zhou, N. (2008). Consumption attitudes and adoption of new consumer products: a contingency approach. European Journal of Marketing, 42(1/2), 238-254. Wilcock, A., Pun, M., Khanona, J., & Aung, M. (2004). Consumer attitudes, knowledge and behaviour: a review of food safety issues. Trends in Food Science & Technology, 15(2), 56-66.

17

Appendix 1 - Qualtrics survey

BSc Thesis - Joris Barbier

Q1 Fijn dat u mee wilt werken aan dit gecombineerde onderzoek! De vragenlijst bestaat uit twee

delen. In het eerste deel wordt uw creativiteit en flexibiliteit getest aan de hand van een kleine

schrijfopdracht. In het tweede deel wordt uw mening over specifieke soort hagelslag gevraagd. Het

invullen van de hele vragenlijst zal ongeveer 10 minuten duren. Er zijn geen goede of foute

antwoorden, en als deelnemer aan dit onderzoek blijft u volledig anoniem. Als u kans wilt maken op

de tegoedbon van Bol.com, laat u dan bij de laatste vraag uw emailadres achter. Dit is niet verplicht.

Om kans te maken dient u de vragenlijst volledig in te vullen. Mocht u nog eventuele vragen hebben,

dan kunt u contact opnemen met Joris Barbier ([email protected])Door op ‘Akkoord’ te klikken,

geeft u aan dat u bovenstaande gelezen heeft en ermee instemt.

Akkoord (1)

Q4 Dit is het eerste deel van het onderzoek, Creatief Schrijven. Hier wordt getest hoe creatief

mensen zijn als zij schrijven over een verplicht onderwerp.Uw schrijfopdracht zal gaan over 'recente

ervaringen in het buitenland'.

Q36 Timing

First Click (1)

Last Click (2)

Page Submit (3)

Click Count (4)

Q6 Wanneer bent u voor het laatst in het buitenland geweest? En wat was de aanleiding? Vertel

hierover in ongeveer 3 tot 5 regels.


mensen zijn als zij schrijven over een verplicht onderwerp.Uw schrijfopdracht zal gaan over 'recente

ervaringen in het buitenland'. Hierin mag u niet alle letters gebruiken

18

Q37 Timing

First Click (1)

Last Click (2)

Page Submit (3)

Click Count (4)


hierover in ongeveer 3 tot 5 regels. Let op: doe dit zonder de letters a en r te gebruiken!

19

Q8 Dit is het tweede deel van het onderzoek. De volgende vragen gaan over onderstaande

hagelslag.Bekijk de afbeelding goed. Beantwoord daarna de vragen.

20

Q9 Deze hagelslag lijkt me

1 (1) 2 (2) 3 (3) 4 (4) 5 (5) 6 (6) 7 (7)

onsmakelijk:smakelijk (1)

Q28 Ik vind deze hagelslag

1 (1) 2 (2) 3 (3) 4 (4) 5 (5) 6 (6) 7 (7)

onaantrekkelijk:aantrekkelijk (1)

Q12 Het eten van een boterham met deze hagelslag lijkt me

1 (1) 2 (2) 3 (3) 4 (4) 5 (5) 6 (6) 7 (7)

onaangenaam:aangenaam (1)


1 (1) 2 (2) 3 (3) 4 (4) 5 (5) 6 (6) 7 (7)

waardeloos:waardevol (1)

Q24 Dit is het tweede deel van het onderzoek. De volgende vragen gaan over een specifieke soort

hagelslag. Bekijk de afbeelding goed. Beantwoord daarna de vragen.

22

Q25 Deze hagelslag lijk me

1 (1) 2 (2) 3 (3) 4 (4) 5 (5) 6 (6) 7 (7)



1 (1) 2 (2) 3 (3) 4 (4) 5 (5) 6 (6) 7 (7)



1 (1) 2 (2) 3 (3) 4 (4) 5 (5) 6 (6) 7 (7)

onaangenaam:aangenaam (1)


1 (1) 2 (2) 3 (3) 4 (4) 5 (5) 6 (6) 7 (7)


23

Q28 Dit is het tweede deel van het onderzoek. De volgende vragen gaan over een specifieke soort

hagelslag. Bekijk de afbeelding goed. Beantwoord daarna de vragen.

24


1 (1) 2 (2) 3 (3) 4 (4) 5 (5) 6 (6) 7 (7)



1 (1) 2 (2) 3 (3) 4 (4) 5 (5) 6 (6) 7 (7)



1 (1) 2 (2) 3 (3) 4 (4) 5 (5) 6 (6) 7 (7)

ongaangenaam:aangenaam (1)


1 (1) 2 (2) 3 (3) 4 (4) 5 (5) 6 (6) 7 (7)


Q22 De volgende vragen gaan over hagelslag in het algemeen

Q23 Hoe vaak eet u hagelslag?

Dagelijks (1)

Wekelijks (2)

Maandelijks (3)

Zelden/nooit (4)

If Zelden/nooit Is Selected, Then Skip To End of Block

25

Q24 Welke hagelslag vindt u het lekkerst?

Puur (1)

Melk (2)

Wit (3)

Anders namelijk: (4) ____________________

Q25 Van welk merk is de hagelslag die u het meeste eet?

Venz (1)

De Ruijter (2)

Huismerk (3)

Anders namelijk (4) ____________________

Q17 Hier volgen nog enkele algemene vragen. Dit is het laatste onderdeel van de vragenlijst.

Q8 Wat is uw geslacht?

Man (1)

Vrouw (2)

Q9 Hoe oud bent u?

Q18 En tot slot: Waar denkt u dat dit onderzoek over ging? Als u het niet weet, hoeft u niks in te

vullen.

Q29 Als u kans wilt maken op de tegoedbon van Bol.com, vult u dan hieronder uw emailadres in. Dit

is niet verplicht.Winnaars krijgen uiterlijk 31 juli bericht

Q39 Dit is het einde van de vragenlijst.Hartelijk bedankt voor uw medewerking!


1 (1) 2 (2) 3 (3) 4 (4) 5 (5) 6 (6) 7 (7)


26

Q11 Een boterham met deze hagelslag lijkt me aangenaam.

1 (1) 2 (2) 3 (3) 4 (4) 5 (5) 6 (6) 7 (7)

aangenaam:onaangenaam (1)

Q26 Ik zou deze hageslag kopen.

1 (1) 2 (2) 3 (3) 4 (4) 5 (5) 6 (6) 7 (7)

waarschijnlijk:onwaarschijnlijk (1)


hierover in ongeveer 100 tot 150 woorden. Let op: doe dit zonder de letters a en r te gebruiken!


studenten zijn als zij schrijven over een verplicht onderwerp.Uw schrijfopdracht zal gaan over

'recente ervaringen in het buitenland'. Hierin mag u niet alle letters gebruiken

Q38 Timing

First Click (1)

Last Click (2)

Page Submit (3)

Click Count (4)


hierover in ongeveer 100 tot 150 woorden. Let op: doe dit zonder de letters a en r te gebruiken!

consumer attitudes towards improved products: an elm approach

Documents