Dans un contexte de mutation des modes de consommation alimentaire, les innovations de discontinuité constituent en enjeu considérable pour l’industrie. L’objectif de cet article est d’identifier les processus cognitifs d’acceptation d’une innovation alimentaire de discontinuité à travers l’étude des mécanismes de classification et d’encodage de la catégorisation. Une étude qualitative appliquée à la consommation humaine d’insectes permet d’identifier ces mécanismes en fonction du degré de transformation des produits, et leurs effets sur l’acceptation par les consommateurs. Ces résultats permettent notamment d’enrichir la théorie du comportement décisionnel et visent à éclairer les fabricants sur les leviers marketing à actionner pour faire accepter une innovation alimentaire de discontinuité.
AlbaJWHutchinsonJW (1987) Dimensions of consumer expertise. Journal of Consumer Research13: 411–454.
2.
AlexanderDLLynchJGJrWangQ (2008) As time goes by: do cold feet follow warm intentions for really new versus incrementally new products?Journal of Marketing Research45(3): 307–319.
3.
AndersonRLOrtinauDJ (1988) Exploring consumers’ postadoption attitudes and use behaviors in monitoring the diffusion of a technology-based discontinuous innovation. Journal of Business Research17(3): 283–298.
4.
AngyalA (1941) Disgust and related aversions. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology36(3): 393–412.
5.
AurierP (1991) Recherche de variété : un concept majeur de la théorie en marketing. Recherche et Applications en Marketing6(1): 85–106.
6.
BaggaCKNoseworthyTJDawarN (2016) Asymmetric consequences of radical innovations on category representations of competing brands. Journal of Consumer Psychology26(1): 29–39.
7.
BardinL (2001) L’analyse de contenu. Paris: PUF.
8.
BratanovaBLoughnanSBastianB (2011) The effect of categorization as food on the perceived moral standing of animals. Appetite57(1): 193–196.
9.
BettmanJRSujanM. (1987) Effects of framing on evaluation of comparable and noncomparable alternatives by expert and novice consumers. Journal of Consumer Research14(2): 141–154.
10.
Caparros MegidoRCGiertsCBleckerCBrostauxYHaubrugeEAlabiTFrancisF (2016) Consumer acceptance of insect-based alternative meat products in Western countries. Food Quality and Preference52: 237–243.
11.
Caparros MegidoRSablonLGeuensMBrostauxYAlabiTBleckerCDrugmandDHaubrugeEFrancisF (2014) Edible insects acceptance by Belgian consumers: promising attitude for entomophagy development. Journal of Sensory Studies29(1): 14–20.
12.
CestreG (1996) Diffusion et innovativité: définition, modélisation et mesure. Recherche et Applications en Marketing11(1): 69–88.
13.
ChapmanHAAndersonAK (2012) Understanding disgust. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences1251: 62–76.
14.
CohenJBBasuK (1987) Alternative models of categorization: toward a contingent processing framework. Journal of Consumer Research13(4): 455–472.
15.
CorbeauJPPoulainJP (2002) Penser l’alimentation. Entre imaginaire et rationalité. Toulouse: Editions Privat.
16.
DavilaADomínguezM (2010) Formats des groupes et types de discussion dans la recherche sociale qualitative. Recherches Qualitatives29(1): 50–68.
17.
DeroyOReadeBSpenceC (2015) The insectivore’s dilemma, and how to take the West out of it. Food Quality and Preference44: 44–55.
18.
EvanschitzkyHEisendMCalantoneRJJiangY (2012) Success factors of product innovation: an updated meta-analysis. Journal of Product Innovation Management29(S1): 21–37.
19.
FagerbergJMoweryDNelsonR (2005) The Oxford Handbook of Innovation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
20.
FalgueraVAliguerNFalgueraM (2012) An integrated approach to current trends in food consumption: moving toward functional and organic products?Food Control26(2): 274–281.
21.
FestingerL (1957) A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance. Evanston, IL: Row, Peterson & Co.
22.
FiskeSTPavelchakMA (1986) Category-based versus piecemeal-based affective responses: Developments in schema-triggered affect. In SorrentinoRMHigginsET (eds) The Handbook of Motivation and Cognition: Foundations of Social Behavior. New York: Guilford, 167–203.
23.
FischlerC (1990) L’homnivore. Paris: Odile Jacob.
24.
FoxallGHaskinsCG (1986) Cognitive style and consumer innovativeness: an empirical test of Kirton’s adaption-innovation theory in the context of food purchasing. European Journal of Marketing20(3/4): 63–80.
25.
FrattiniFBianchiMMassisADSikimicU (2013). The role of early adopters in the diffusion of new products: differences between platform and nonplatform innovations. Journal of Product Innovation and Management31(3): 1–23.
26.
GallenC (2005) Le rôle des représentations mentales dans le processus de choix, une approche pluridisciplinaire appliquée au cas des produits alimentaires. Recherche et Applications en Marketing20(3): 59–76.
27.
GarciaRCalantoneR (2002) A critical look at technological innovation typology and innovativeness terminology: a literature review. Journal of Product Innovation Management19(2): 110–132.
28.
GatignonHXuerebJM (1997) Strategic orientation of the firm and new product performance. Journal of Marketing Research34: 77–90.
29.
GilovichTGriffinDKahnemanD (2002) Heuristics and Biases: The Psychology of Intuitive Judgment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
30.
GmuerAGuthJNHartmannCSiegristM (2016) Effects of the degree of processing of insect ingredients in snacks on expected emotional experiences and willingness to eat. Food Quality and Preference54: 117–127.
HamermanEJ (2016) Cooking and disgust sensitivity influence preference for attending insect-based food events. Appetite96: 319–326.
33.
HartmannCShiJGiustoASiegristM (2015) The psychology of eating insects: a cross-cultural comparison between Germany and China. Food Quality and Preference44: 148–156.
34.
HenardDHSzymanskiDM (2001) Why some new products are more successful than others. Journal of Marketing Research38(3): 362–375.
35.
HoefflerS (2003). Measuring preferences for really new products. Journal of Marketing Research40(4): 406–420.
36.
HouseJ (2016) Consumer acceptance of insect-based foods in the Netherlands: academic and commercial implications. Appetite107: 47–58.
ImramN (1999) The role of visual cues in consumer perception and acceptance of a food product. Nutrition and Food Science99 (5): 224–230.
39.
KahnemanDSlovicPTverskyA (1982) Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
40.
KahnemanDTverskyA (1984) Choices, values, and frames. American Psychologist39(4): 341.
41.
KellertSR (1993) Values and perceptions of invertebrates. Conservation Biology: The Journal of the Society for Conservation Biology7: 845–855.
42.
KolbeRHBurnettMS (1991) Content-analysis research: an examination of applications with directives for improving research reliability and objectivity. Journal of Consumer Research18(2): 243–250.
43.
LadweinR (1993) Extension de marque et catégories cognitives: contribution expérimentale à l’évaluation de l’extension de marque. Thèse de doctorat: Université Lille1.
44.
LadweinR (1995) Catégories cognitives et jugement de typicalité en comportement du consommateur. Recherche et Applications en Marketing10(2): 89–100.
Le Nagard-AssayagEManceauD (2011) Le marketing de l’innovation: De la création au lancement de nouveaux produits. 2ème édn. Paris: Dunod.
48.
LintonJD (2002) Forecasting the market diffusion of disruptive and discontinuous innovation. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management49(4): 365–374
49.
LooyHDunkelFWoodJ (2014) How then shall we eat? Insect-eating attitudes and sustainable foodways. Agriculture and Human Values31: 131–141.
50.
LowePPhillipsonJLeeRP (2008) Socio-technical innovation for sustainable food chains: roles for social science. Trends in Food Science and Technology19(5): 226–233.
McDermottCMO’ConnorGC (2002) Managing radical innovation: an overview of emergent strategy issues. Journal of Product Innovation Management19(6): 424–438.
53.
McFarlaneTPlinerP (1997) Increasing willingness to taste novel foods: effects of nutrition and taste information. Appetite28(3): 227–238.
54.
MethvenLLangreneyEPrescottJ (2012) Changes in liking for a no added salt soup as a function of exposure. Food Quality and Preference26(2): 135–140.
55.
Meyers-LevyJTyboutAM (1989) Schema congruity as a basis for product evaluation. Journal of Consumer Research16: 39–54.
56.
MignonJ (2002) L’entomophagie : une question de culture ?Tropicultura20(3): 151–155.
57.
MillerWLMorrisL (1999) 4th Generation R&D: Managing Knowledge, Technology and Innovation. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
58.
MoreauCPMarkmanABLehmannDR (2001a) “What is it?” Categorization flexibility and consumers’ responses to really new products. Journal of Consumer Research27(4): 489–498.
59.
MoreauCPLehmannDRMarkmanAB (2001b) Entrenched knowledge structures and consumer response to new products. Journal of Marketing Research38(1): 14–29.
60.
MoscoviciS (1994) La mentalité prélogique des primitifs et la mentalité prélogique des civilisés. In: MoscoviciS (éd.) Psychologie Sociale des Relations à Autrui. Paris: Nathan, 208–231.
61.
MuchS (2012) Insectes comestibles. Toulouse: Plume de carotte, collection Terra curiosa.
62.
NoseworthyTJCotteJLeeSH (2011) The effects of ad context and gender on the identification of visually incongruent products. Journal of Consumer Research38(2): 358–375.
63.
OdouP (2005) L’heuristique d’ancrage et d’ajustement comme mode d’évaluation d’un produit nouveau. Recherche et Applications en Marketing20(3): 21–38.
64.
OonincxDGABDe BoerIJM (2012) Environmental impact of the production of mealworms as a protein source for humans - a life cycle assessment. PLoS One7(12): e51145.
65.
OstlundLE (1974) Perceived innovation attributes as predictors of innovativeness. Journal of Consumer Research1(2): 23–29.
66.
PereiraLNMendesJCMendesJP (2016) A marketing strategy for a new functional fish. Aquaculture Economics & Management20: 1–21.
67.
PhamMT (1996) Cue representation and selection effects of arousal on persuasion. Journal of Consumer Research22(4): 373–387.
68.
PiagetJ (1962) Play, Dreams, and Imitation in Childhood, trans. GattegnoCHodgsonFM. New York: Norton.
69.
PiagetJ (1970) Piaget’s theory . trans . GellerierGLangerJ,. In: MussenPH (éd.), Carmichael’s Manual of Child Psychology, 3ème édn, Vol. 1. NewYork: John Wiley.
70.
PintoMP (1999) Les univers de consommation : application du principe de catégorisation. Décisions Marketing17(mai-août): 37–43.
71.
PlinerP (1982) The effects of mere exposure on liking for edible substances. Appetite3: 283–290.
72.
PlinerPHobdenK (1992) Development of a scale to measure the trait of food neophobia in humans. Appetite19: 105–120.
73.
PlinerPPelchatMGrabskiM (1993) Reduction of neophobia in humans by exposure to novel foods. Appetite20: 111–123.
74.
PlinerPSalvyS (2006) Food neophobia in humans. Frontiers in Nutritional Science3: 75.
75.
RamSShethJN (1989) Consumer resistance to innovations: the marketing problem and its solutions. Journal of Consumer Marketing6(2): 5–14.
76.
Ramos-ElorduyJ (2009) Anthropo-entomophagy: cultures, evolution and sustainability. Entomological Research39: 271–288.
77.
RaubenheimerDRothmanJM (2013) Nutritional ecology of entomophagy in humans and other primates. Annual Review of Entomology58: 141–160.
78.
ReinertM (2007) Contenu des discours et approche statistique. In: GauzenteCPeyrat-GuillardD (éds), Analyse statistique de données textuelles en sciences de gestion. Colombelles: EMS, 21–45.
79.
RobertsonTS (1971) Innovative Behavior and Communication. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
80.
RoehrichGValette-FlorencePFerrandiJM (2002) Comparaison de la validité prédictive de deux conceptualisations de l’innovativité., In: Actes du 18ème Congrès International de l’Association Française du Marketing, Lille, 295–310.
81.
RogersEM (2003) Diffusion of Innovations. 3ème édn. New York: Free Press.
RoschEMervisCB (1975) Family resemblances: studies in the internal structure of categories. Cognitive Psychology7(4): 573–605.
84.
RozinP (1995) Des goûts et dégoûts. In: BessisS (éd.), Mille et une bouches. Cuisines et identités culturelles. Paris: Autrement, Coll. Mutations/Mangeurs, N°154.
85.
RozinPFallonA (1980) The psychological categorization of foods and non-foods: a preliminary taxonomy of food rejections. Appetite1(3): 193–201.
86.
RozinPFallonA (1986) The acquisition of likes and dislikes for foods. In: What is America Eating? Proceedings of a Symposium. Washington (DC): National Academies Press, 58–71.
87.
RozinPFallonAE (1987) A perspective on disgust. Psychological Review94(1): 23.
88.
RozinPNemeroffC (2002) Sympathetic magical thinking: the contagion and similarity “heuristics”. In: GilovichTGriffinDKahnemanDHeuristics and Biases: The Psychology of Intuitive Judgment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 201–216.
89.
RumpoldBASchlüterOK (2013) Potential and challenges of insects as an innovative source for food and feed production. Innovative Food Science & Emerging Technologies17: 1–11.
90.
SchwarzNCloreGL (1983) Mood, misattribution, and judgments of well-being: informative and directive functions of affective states. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology45(3): 513.
91.
SchwarzNCloreGL (1988) How do I feel about it? Informative functions of affective states. In: FiedlerKForgasJ (éds), Affect, Cognition, and Social Behavior. Toronto: Hogrefe International, 44–62.
92.
SérédeLanauzeG (2015) L’adoption d’un produit alimentaire nouveau face à des freins culturels forts : le cas de l’entomophagie en France. Décisions Marketing79: 15–33
93.
ShelomiM (2015) Why we still don’t eat insects: assessing entomophagy promotion through a diffusion of innovations framework. Trends in Food Science & Technology45: 311–318.
94.
SiroIKápolnaEKápolnaBLugasiA (2008) Functional food. Product development, marketing and consumer acceptance – a review. Appetite51(3): 456–467.
95.
SteenkampJBEGielensK (2003) Consumer and market drivers of the trial probability of new consumer packaged goods. Journal of Consumer Research30(3): 368–384.
96.
TanHFischerATinchanPStiegerMSteenbekkersLVan TrijpH (2015) Insects as food: exploring cultural exposure and individual experience as determinants of acceptance. Food Quality and Preference42: 78–89.
97.
TaylorSECrockerJ (1981). Schematic bases of social information processing. Social Cognition: The Ontario Symposium1: 89–134.
TuorilaHLähteenmäkiLPohjalainenLLottiL (2001) Food neophobia among the Finns and related responses to familiar and unfamiliar foods. Food Quality and Preference12(1): 29–37.
100.
TuorilaHMeiselmanHCardelloALesherL (1998) Effect of expectations and the definition of product category on the acceptance of unfamiliar foods. Food Quality and Preference9(6): 421–430.
101.
TverskyAKahnemanD (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 185(4157): 1124–1131.
102.
Van HuisA (2013) Potential of insects as food and feed in assuring food security. Annual Reviews in Entomology58: 563–583.
103.
Van HuisAVan ItterbeeckJKlunderHMertensEHalloranAMuirGVantommeP (2013) Edible Insects, Future Prospects for Food and Feed Security. Food And Agriculture Organization of the United Nations and Wageningen UR. Disponible en ligne: http://www.fao.org/docrep/018/i3253e/i3253e.pdf
104.
VerbekeW (2015) Profiling consumers who are ready to adopt insects as a meat substitute in a Western society. Food Quality and Preference39: 147–155.
105.
VerkerkMCTramperJVan TrijpJCMMartensDE (2007) Insect cells for human food. Biotechnology Advances25: 198–202.
106.
VernetteEFloresL (2004). Communiquer avec les leaders d’opinion en marketing: Comment et dans quels médias?Décisions Marketing: 23–37.
107.
VeryzerRW (1998) Discontinuous innovation and the new product development process. Journal of Product Innovation Management15(4): 304–321.
108.
ViallesN (1987) Le sang et la chair. Les abattoirs des pays de l’Adour. Paris: MSH.
109.
VolleP (1995) Le concept de risque perçu en psychologie du consommateur : antécédents et statut théorique. Recherche et Applications en Marketing10(1): 39–56.
110.
ZajoncRB (1968) Attitudinal effects of mere exposure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology9:1.
