L’objectif de cette recherche est d’étudier si une mention de la gouvernance coopérative de l’entreprise influence le goût perçu du produit à travers un processus de transfert de sensation. Une première étude mesure le goût implicitement (via un Test d’Association Implicite) et explicitement (via un questionnaire) perçu en l’absence de marque sur l’emballage. La mention améliore le goût implicitement et explicitement perçu. Une deuxième étude reproduisant les mêmes protocoles en présence de marques nationales confirme ce résultat sur le goût implicitement perçu mais l’effet de la mention sur le goût explicitement perçu disparait. Considérant que les attitudes implicites sont plus prédictives des comportements d’achat routiniers en grandes surfaces que les attitudes explicites, les résultats préconisent l’affichage de la gouvernance coopérative sur les produits alimentaires.
AckermannCLMathieuJP (2015) De l’attitude implicite et de sa mesure : fondements et pratiques en comportement du consommateur. Recherche et Applications en Marketing31(1): 58–81.
2.
AkerlofGA (1970) The market for “lemons”: Quality uncertainty and the market mechanism. The Quarterly Journal of Economics84(3): 488–500.
3.
Alliance Coopérative Internationale (1995) Déclaration sur l’identité coopérative. Congrès de Manchester, Réseau coop2(3): 11.
4.
AnnettLEMuralidharanVBoxallPCCashSBWismerWV (2008) Influence of health and environmental information on hedonic evaluation of organic and conventional bread. Journal of Food Science73(4): 50–57.
5.
Aouina-MejriCBhaltiD (2014) CSR: Consumer responses to the social quality of private labels. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services21(3): 357–363.
6.
BarghJA (1994) The four horsemen of automaticity: Awareness, intention, efficiency, and control in social cognition. Handbook of Social Cognition1: 1–40.
7.
BarnardCI (1938) The Functions of the Executive. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
8.
BéalMSabadieW (2018) The impact of customer inclusion in firm governance on customers’ commitment and voice behaviors. Journal of Business Research92: 1–8.
9.
BernardJCLiuY (2017) Are beliefs stronger than taste? A field experiment on organic and local apples. Food and Quality Preference61: 55–62.
10.
BerleAAMeansGC (1932) The Modern Corporation and Private Property. New York: Harcourt.
11.
BloomPNReveT (1990) Transmitting signals to consumers for competitive advantage. Business Horizons33(4): 58–66.
12.
BowenHR (1953) Social Responsibilities of the Businessman. New-York: Harper & Brothers.
13.
BraduCOrquinJLThøgersenJ (2014) The mediated influence of a traceability label on consumer’s willingness to buy the labelled product. Journal of Business Ethics124(2): 283–295.
14.
BratanovaBVauclairCMKervynNSchumannSWoodRKleinO (2015) Savouring morality. Moral satisfaction renders food of ethical origin subjectively tastier. Appetite91: 137–149.
15.
BrunelFFTietjeBCGreenwaldAG (2004) Is the implicit association test a valid and valuable measure of implicit consumer social cognition?Journal of Consumer Psychology14(4): 385–404.
16.
CadburyA (1992) Report of the Committee on the Financial Aspects of Corporate Governance. London: Edition Gee.
17.
CapelliSSabadieWSéguinM (2019) La différence coopérative fait-elle la différence pour les consommateurs ?Revue Française de Gestion45(280): 29–55.
18.
CardelloAVSawyerFM (1992) Effects of disconfirmed consumer expectations on food acceptability. Journal of Sensory Studies7(4): 253–277.
19.
CarpenterMLarceneuxF (2008) Label equity and the effectiveness of values-based labels: an experiment with two French Protected Geographic Indication labels. International Journal of Consumer Studies 32(5): 499–507.
20.
ChaeBHoeggJ (2013) The future looks “right”: effects of the horizontal location of advertising images on product attitude. Journal of Consumer Research40(2): 223–238.
21.
CheskinL (1954) Color Guide for Marketing Media. New York: McMillan.
22.
CheskinL (1957) How to Predict What People Will Buy. New York: Liveright Publishing Corporation.
23.
ClarkTKeyTMHodisMRajaratnamD (2014) The intellectual ecology of mainstream marketing research: an inquiry into the place of marketing in the family of business disciplines. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science42(3): 223–241.
24.
ClarksonME (1995) A stakeholder framework for analyzing and evaluating corporate social performance. Academy of Management Review20(1): 92–117.
25.
CoderreFCoto MoyaLGCorrea HernandezJMurua MejoradaA (2005) Imagen de las cooperativas de ahorro y préstamo : desarrollo de un instrumento de medida internacional. UniRcoop1(3): 282–289.
CornellBShapiroAC (1987) Corporate stakeholders and corporate finance. Financial Management16(1): 5–14.
29.
DarbyMRKarniE (1973) Free competition and the optimal amount of fraud. Journal of Law and Economics16(1): 67–88.
30.
DekhiliSd’HautevilleF (2009) Effect of the region of origin on the perceived quality of olive oil: an experimental approach using a control group. Food Quality and Preference20(7): 525–532.
31.
DelizaRMacFieHJH (1996) The generation of sensory expectation by external cues and its effect on sensory perception and hedonic ratings: a review. Journal of Sensory Studies11(2): 103–128.
32.
DineenBRleenyDG (2016) Third party employment branding: human capital inflows and outflows following “best places to work” certifications. Academy of Management Journal59(1): 92–110.
33.
DransfieldENgapoTMNielsenNABredahlLSjödénPOMagnussonMCampoMMNuteGR (2005) Consumer choice and suggested price for pork as influenced by its appearance, taste and information concerning country of origin and organic pig production. Meat Science69(1): 61–70.
34.
DufeuIFerrandiJMGabrielPLe Gall-ElyM (2014) Multi-labellisation socio-environnementale et consentement à payer du consommateur. Recherche et Applications en Marketing29(3): 34–55.
35.
Faure-FerletACapelliSSabadieW (2017) Les coopératives agricoles doivent-elles dévoiler leur mode de gouvernance aux consommateurs de produits agroalimentaires ?Décision Marketing85(1): 63-80.
36.
FazioRHChenJ-MMcDonelECShermanSJ (1982) Attitude accessibility, attitude-behavior consistency and the strength of the object-evaluation association. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology18(4): 339–357.
37.
FazioRHSanbonmatsuDMPowellMCKardesFR (1986) On the automatic activation of attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology50(2): 229–38.
38.
FazioRHOlsonMA (2003) Implicit measures in social cognition research: their meaning and use. Annual Review of Psychology54(1): 297–327.
39.
FernqvistFEkelundL (2014) Credence and the effect on consumer liking of food – A review. Food and Quality Preference32(C): 340–353.
40.
FestingerL (1957) A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
41.
FischlerC (1990) L’Homnivore. Paris: Odile Jacob.
42.
FischlerC (2001) La peur est dans l’assiette. Revue Française de Marketing183–184: 7–11.
43.
FishbeinM (1963) An investigation of the relationships between beliefs about an object and the attitude toward that object. Human Relations16(3): 233–239.
GrankvistGLekedalHMarmendalM (2007). Values and eco- and fair-trade labelled products. British Food Journal109(2): 169–181.
46.
GreenwaldAGBanajiMR (1995) Implicit social cognition: attitudes, self-esteem and stereotypes. Psychological Review102(1): 4–27.
47.
GreenwaldAGBanajiMRRudmanLAFarnhamSDNosekBAMellottDS (2002) A unified theory of implicit attitudes, stereotypes, self-esteem, and self-concept. Psychological Review109(1): 3–25.
48.
GreenwaldAGMcGheeDESchwartzJL (1998) Measuring individual differences in implicit cognition: the implicit association test. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology74(6): 14–64.
49.
GreenwaldAGNosekBABanajiMR (2003) Understanding and using the implicit association test: I. An improved scoring algorithm. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology85(2): 197–216.
50.
GreenwaldAGPoehlmanTAUhlmannEBanajiMR (2009) Understanding and using the Implicit Association Test: III. Meta-analysis of predictive validity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology97(1): 17–41.
51.
GrunertKG (2005) Food quality and safety: consumer perception and demand. European Review of Agricultural Economics32(3): 369–391.
52.
Guillot-SoulezCSaint-OngeSSoulezS (2019) Exploration des liens entre la communication de labels employeurs dans les annonces de recrutement, le mode de gouvernance et l’attractivité des organisations aux yeux des candidats. Recherche et Applications en Marketing34(3): 6–32.
53.
Herédia-ColaçoVCoelho do ValeRVillas-BoasSB (2019) Does Fair Trade breed contempt? A cross-country examination on the moderating role of brand familiarity and consumer expertise on product evaluation. Journal of Business Ethics156(3): 737–758.
54.
HughnerRSMcDonaghPProtheroAShultzCJStantonJ (2007) Who are organic food consumers? A compilation and review of why people purchase organic food. Journal of Consumer Behaviour6(2–3): 94–110.
55.
IPSOS (2013) Synthèse et enseignement de l’étude IPSOS réalisée auprès des Français et des agriculteurs sur la connaissance et la perception des coopératives agricoles. Congrès de la coopération agricole, Paris.
56.
JongmansEDampératMJeannotFLeiPJolibertA (2019) What is the added value of an organic label? Proposition of a model of transfer from the perspective of ingredient branding. Journal of Marketing Management35(3-4): 338–363.
57.
JongmansEJolibertAIrwinJ (2014) Toujours plus, toujours mieux ? Effet contre-intuitif de l’évaluation des attributs environnementaux du produit par le consommateur. Recherche et Applications en Marketing29(3): 10–33.
58.
JussilaIByrneNTuominenH (2012) Affective commitment in co-operative organizations: what makes members want to stay?International Business Research5(10): 1–10.
59.
KahnemanD (2011) Thinking, Fast and Slow. New York: Farrar, Strauss, Giroux.
60.
KardesFRPosavacSSCronleyML (2004) Consumer inference: a review of processes, bases, and judgment contexts. Journal of Consumer Psychology14(3): 230–256.
61.
KellerKL (1993) Conceptualizing, measuring, and managing customer-based brand equity. Journal of Marketing57(1): 1–22.
62.
KidwellBFarmerAHardestyDM (2013) Getting liberals and conservatives to go green: political ideology and congruent appeals. Journal of Consumer Research40(2): 350–367.
63.
KrishnaAMorrinM (2008) Does touch affect taste? The perceptual transfer of product container haptic cues. Journal of Consumer Research34(6): 807–818.
64.
LarceneuxF (2003) Segmentation des signes de qualité : labels expérientiels et labels techniques. Décisions Marketing29(1): 35–46.
65.
LarceneuxFBenoit-MoreauFRenaudinV (2012) Why might organic labels fail to influence consumer choices? Marginal labelling and brand equity effects. Journal of Consumer Policy35(1): 85–104.
66.
LecuyerCCapelliSSabadieW (2017) Corporate social responsibility: communication effects, a comparison between investor-owned banks and member-owned banks. Journal of Advertising Research57(5): 1–27.
67.
LecuyerCCapelliSSabadieW (2019) Consumers’ implicit attitudes toward corporate social responsibility and corporate abilities: examining the influence of bank governance using the implicit association test. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services. Epub avant impression 15 novembre 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2019.101989.
68.
LeeWJShimizuMKniffinKMWansinkB (2013) You taste what you see: do organic labels taste perceptions?Food Quality Preference29(1): 33–39.
69.
LotzSChrisandlFFetchenhauerD (2013) What is fair is good: evidence of consumers’ taste for fairness. Food Quality and Preference30(2): 139–144.
70.
LudeMPrüglR (2018) Why the family business brand matters: brand authenticity and the family firm trust inference. Journal of Business Research89: 121–134.
71.
MaiRHoffmannSLasarovWBuhsA (2019) Ethical products = less strong: how explicit and implicit reliance on the lay theory affects consumption behaviors. Journal of Business Ethics158(3): 659–677.
72.
MaiRSymmankCSeeberg-ElverfeldtB (2016) Light and pale colors in food packaging: when does this package cue signal superior healthiness or inferior tastiness?Journal of Retailing92(4): 426–444.
73.
MerleAHerault-FournierCWerleC (2016) Les effets de la mention d’origine géographique locale sur les perceptions alimentaires. Recherche et Applications en Marketing31(1): 28–45.
74.
Ministère de l’Economie Sociale et Solidaire (2013) Projet de loi économie sociale et solidaire : entreprendre autrement pour créer des emplois dans nos territoires. Disponible en ligne :http://www.economie.gouv.fr/files/pjl-ess-dp.pdf (consulté le 18 décembre 2019).
75.
MitchellRKAgleBRWoodDJ (1997) Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: defining the principle of who and what really counts. The Academy of Management Review22(4): 853–886.
76.
MoserRRaffaelliRThilmany-McFaddenD (2011) Consumer preferences for fruit and vegetables with credence-based attributes: a review. International Food and Agribusiness Management Review14:121–141.
77.
MoskowitzHRSaguyISStrausT (2009) An Integrated Approach to New Food Product Development. Boca Raton: CRC Press.
78.
NabecL (2017) Améliorer les comportements alimentaires avec l’étiquetage nutritionnel : vers un agenda de recherche au service du bien-être des consommateurs. Recherche et Applications en Marketing32(2): 76–104.
79.
NapolitanoFBraghieriAPiasentierEFavottoSNaspettiSZanoliR (2010) Effect of information about organic production on beef liking and consumer willingness to pay. Food Quality and Preference21(2): 207–212.
80.
NapolitanoFCaporaleGCarlucciAMonteleoneE (2007) Effect of information about animal welfare and product nutritional properties on acceptability of meat from Podolian cattle. Food Quality and Preference18(2): 305–312.
81.
NosekBASmythFL (2007) A multitrait-multimethod validation of the Implicit Association Test: implicit and explicit attitudes are related but distinct constructs. Experimental Psychology54(1) : 14–29.
82.
ParkCWIyerESSmithDC (1989) The effects of situational factors on instore grocery shopping behavior: the role of store environment and time available for shopping. Journal of Consumer Research15(4): 422–433.
83.
Piqueras-FiszmanBSpenceC (2015) Sensory expectations based on product-extrinsic food cues: an interdisciplinary review of the empirical evidence and theoretical accounts. Food and Quality Preference40(A): 165–179.
84.
Piqueras-FiszmanBVeslascoCSpenceC (2012) Exploring implicit and explicit crossmodal colour–flavour correspondences in product packaging. Food Quality and Preference25(2): 148–155.
85.
PoelmanAMojetJLyonDSefa-DedehS (2008) The influence of information about organic production and fair trade on preferences for and perception of pineapple. Food and Quality Preference19(1): 114–121.
86.
RaoARQuLRuekertRW (1999) Signaling unobservable product quality through a brand ally. Journal of Marketing Research36(2): 258–268.
87.
ResanoHSanjuánAIbisuLM (2007) Consumers’ acceptability of cured ham in Spain and the influence of information. Food Quality and Preference18(8): 1064–1076.
88.
RiosKFinkelsteinSRLandaJ (2015) Is there a “fair” in fair-trade? Social dominance orientation influences perceptions of and preferences for fair-trade products. Journal of Business Ethics130(1): 171–180.
89.
SamsonAVoyerBG (2012) Two minds, three ways: dual system and dual process models in consumer psychology. AMS Review2(2‑4): 48–71.
90.
SchiffersteinHNOude OphuisPA (1998) Health-related determinants of organic food consumption in the Netherlands. Food Quality and Preference9(3): 119–133.
91.
SkaczkowskiGDurkinCKashimaYWakefieldM (2016) The effect of packaging, branding and labeling on the experience of unhealthy food and drink: a review. Appetite99: 219–234.
92.
SörqvistPHagaALangeborgLHolmgrenMWallinderMNöstlASeagerPBMarshJE (2015) The green halo: mechanisms and limits of the eco-label effect. Food and Quality Preference43: 1–9.
93.
StanovitchKEWestRF (2000) Individual differences in reasoning: implications for the rationality debate?Behavioral and Brain Sciences23(5): 645–665.
94.
TagbataDSirieixL (2008) Measuring consumer’s willingness to pay for organic and Fair Trade products. International Journal of Consumer Studies32(5): 479–490.
95.
TangSFengYHanJChenShiJ (2016) Taste moral, taste good: the effects of Fairtrade logo and second language on product taste evaluation. Food and Quality Preference50: 152–156.
96.
TijssenIOJMZandstraEHden BoerAJagerG (2019) Taste matters most: effects of package design on the dynamics of implicit and explicit product evaluations over repeated in-home consumption. Food and Quality Preference72: 126–135.
97.
TrendelOMazodierMVohsKD (2018) Making warnings about misleading advertising and product recalls more effective: an implicit attitude perspective. Journal of Marketing Research55(2): 265–276.
98.
TrendelOWarlopL (2005) Présentation et applications des mesures implicites de restitution mémorielle en marketing. Recherche et Applications en Marketing20(2): 77–104.
99.
TrendelOWarlopL (2013) Mémorisation des parrains : l’influence de la congruence du parrainage réexaminée à l’aide du modèle de flexibilité de l’encodage. Recherche et Applications en Marketing28(4): 28–46.
100.
TverskyAKahnemanD (1974) Judgment under uncertainty: heuristics and biases. Science185(4157): 1124–1131.
101.
WebbDJMohrLAHarrisKE (2008) A re-examination of socially responsible consumption and its measurement. Journal of Business Research61(2): 91–98.
102.
WerleCTrendelOArditoG (2013) Unhealthy food is not tastier for everybody: The “healthy=tasty” French intuition. Food Quality and Preference28(1): 116–121.
103.
WiedmannKPHennigsNBehrensSHKlarmannC (2014) Tasting green: an experimental design for investigating consumer perception of organic wine. British Food Journal116: 197–211.
104.
WinkielmanPSchwarzNFazendeiroTReberR (2003) The hedonic marking of processing fluency: implications for evaluative judgment. In : MuschJKlauerKC (eds) The Psychology of Evaluation: Affective Processes in Cognition and Emotion. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers, 189–217.
