Submitted Successfully!
To reward your contribution, here is a gift for you: A free trial for our video production service.
Thank you for your contribution! You can also upload a video entry or images related to this topic.
Version Summary Created by Modification Content Size Created at Operation
1
Tamara Gajić
 -- 1493 2022-09-21 20:07:11 |
2 Format correction
Sirius Huang
 Meta information modification 1493 2022-09-22 03:17:03 |

Video Upload Options

Do you have a full video?
Send video materials Upload full video

Confirm

Are you sure to Delete?
Yes No
Cite
If you have any further questions, please contact Encyclopedia Editorial Office.
Gajić, T.;  Raljić, J.P.;  Blešić, I.;  Aleksić, M.;  Petrović, M.D.;  Radovanović, M.M.;  Vuković, D.B.;  Sikimić, V.;  Pivac, T.;  Kostić, M.; et al. Factors Influencing Soluble/Instant Espresso Coffee Selection/Reselection Intention. Encyclopedia. Available online: https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/27452 (accessed on 08 July 2024).
Gajić T,  Raljić JP,  Blešić I,  Aleksić M,  Petrović MD,  Radovanović MM, et al. Factors Influencing Soluble/Instant Espresso Coffee Selection/Reselection Intention. Encyclopedia. Available at: https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/27452. Accessed July 08, 2024.
Gajić, Tamara, Jovanka Popov Raljić, Ivana Blešić, Milica Aleksić, Marko D. Petrović, Milan M. Radovanović, Darko B. Vuković, Višnja Sikimić, Tatjana Pivac, Marija Kostić, et al. "Factors Influencing Soluble/Instant Espresso Coffee Selection/Reselection Intention" Encyclopedia, https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/27452 (accessed July 08, 2024).
Gajić, T.,  Raljić, J.P.,  Blešić, I.,  Aleksić, M.,  Petrović, M.D.,  Radovanović, M.M.,  Vuković, D.B.,  Sikimić, V.,  Pivac, T.,  Kostić, M.,  Sekulić, D.,  Vukolić, D.,  Penić, M., & Ivanović, O.M. (2022, September 21). Factors Influencing Soluble/Instant Espresso Coffee Selection/Reselection Intention. In Encyclopedia. https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/27452
Gajić, Tamara, et al. "Factors Influencing Soluble/Instant Espresso Coffee Selection/Reselection Intention." Encyclopedia. Web. 21 September, 2022.
Factors Influencing Soluble/Instant Espresso Coffee Selection/Reselection Intention
Edit
This entry is adapted from the peer-reviewed paper 10.3390/su141710701

Soluble or instant espresso coffee in capsules with added values is a product that is increasingly recognized as a healthy lifestyle habit, which often goes together with the expansion of spa centers and spa hotels. Defining the factors that influence instant espresso coffee reselection can help to understand influences on certain consumer behaviors and improve sustainability on the market.

soluble espresso coffee instant espresso coffee reselection intention sustainability

1. Introduction

The coffee plant (lat. Coffea) is a genus of evergreen shrubs or low trees and includes about 40 species that grow in pleotropic areas, mostly in Africa [1]. The global coffee market reached a value of USD 12.1 billion in 2020. Europe is followed by the Asia-Pacific region, North America, Latin America, the Middle East and Africa. In 2020, people drank an average of 0.1 cups of instant coffee per capita per day in the United States [2]. Europe is the largest consumer of instant coffee in the world with a market share of 37%, followed by China (12%) and the United States (11%). As of July 2020, instant coffee deliveries accounted for 9.1% of all coffee delivered worldwide—an increase of 1% compared to 2019 (ICO’s Statistics). In 2020, an estimated 5.22 million people in the United Kingdom used instant coffee four times a day or more, [3]. However, in 2020, there is a significant increase in the consumption of instant coffee in capsules because of the circumstances of the pandemic, which due to the changed requirements of tourists, has become an indispensable service in rooms and apartments of accommodation units of higher categories [4][5].

2. Soluble/Instant Espresso Coffee Consumption Habit as a Healthy Lifestyle Choice

The habit of drinking coffee and its effect on health is a current topic, especially when it comes to soluble/instant coffees and their added values. Consuming coffee every day can be a way to a more sustainable and healthier lifestyle [6][7]. Coffee, in its different types and products, has been on the market for centuries [8]. Smell, taste and the social aspects of coffee consumption are some of the habits that create positive effects on many aspects of a person’s health [9]. Many studies talk about how coffee consumption triggers positive emotions such as pleasure, kindness, calmness and happiness [10]. Furthermore, some research confirms that there is no link between controlled coffee consumption and negative emotions [11]. A study conducted at Harvard using a sample of 50,000 women found that the risk of depression decreases as caffeinated coffee consumption increases [12]. Coffee beans contain antioxidants, which are important in health protection [13]. In addition, chlorogenic acid, which is a polyphenol abundant in coffee, reduces inflammatory processes or obesity [14][15]. Scientists claim that consuming one cup of coffee a day reduces the risk of type 2 diabetes [16][17]. Coffee provides a boost for athletes and has proven to be a stimulant in training, and is also as a stimulant in the development of science and improving human brain function [18]. There is a growing use of functional coffee, or coffee with added values such as minerals and vitamins that contribute to a healthier lifestyle [19][20]. Furthermore, much research highlights the use of organic coffee in biodegradable packaging that contributes to sustainable development [21]. A controlled daily intake of coffee can be a healthy way of life that does not have to be eliminated for various reasons throughout life. [22]. An ingredient in coffee, methylxanthine has long been used by humans in their diet [23].

3. Factors Influencing Soluble/Instant Espresso Coffee Selection and Reselection Intention

Various research has been carried out on the topic of the requirements of current modern consumers [24][25]. Mărcuţă et al. [26] pointed out that current consumers are looking for unique, sensory experiences that, according to them, can only be found in original, simple, traditional products. They point out that sensory preferences are the main motive for choosing the type of product. Suki [27] argued that intention plays a key role in influencing actual behavior, as well as in establishing a strong and close connection with actual behavior. Gajić et al. [28][29][30] found that there are eight factors that influence consumer choice: perceived financial risk, perceived risk of use, perceived psychological risk, perceived social risk, perception of weather risk, perception of convenience, perception of social benefit and perception of economic benefit. According to Ajzen and Fishbein [31] the best tool for predicting behavior is the intention that influences the behavior to be performed. Using preference mapping, Geel et al. [32] claimed in their study of a total sample of 199 respondents in South Africa, that four groups of coffee consumers were identified, “pure coffee lovers” (23%), “those who drink coffee blends” (30%), “general coffee users” (37%) and “non-serious coffee users” (10%). Huang and Dang [33] in their work, An Empirical Analysis on Purchase Intention on Coffee Beverage in Taiwan, came up with results that show that brand and price, product image, promotion and advertising, motivation, atmosphere and environment and taste are critical factors which affect the intention of coffee buyers. However, promotion and advertising play a major role in attracting customers [34]. Gonibala and Tumewu [35] claimed that taste, price, service and food quality are no longer the main concern for customers. The company should implement the right strategy, new concepts and creative ideas to make consumers feel comfortable. They conducted the survey on a sample of 60 respondents living in the city of Manado. In a total sample of 1368 respondents in Brazil, Sousa et al. [36] found that attitude, habits and sensory preferences affect the choice of coffee type. Ágoston et al. [37] identified six motivating factors: alertness, habit, mood, social, taste and symptom management.
Modeling liking as a function of both perceived intensity and physical concentration provides a richer interpretation of consumer data [38]. Chin et al. [39] conducted a survey on predictors influencing Starbucks coffee selection on a total sample of 224 students at Taiwan colleges. Reasonable price and brand image were the main factors for buying coffee at Starbucks. Barahona et al. [40] found in their research that factory sensory attributes have a greater impact on purchase intentions than tasting attributes. Anssi and Sanna [41] claimed that the subjective norms of buying organic food influenced the intention to buy indirectly through the formation of attitudes. In addition, the results showed that the modified TPB model predicts intention to buy organic food better than the original model. A consumer-based perceptual/evaluation construct that is relative to a person, place and time and that is subject to the same influences of context and expectation as other phenomena of perception/evaluation is a measure of food quality [42]. Wandebori and Wijaya [43] applied a quantitative method to a total sample of 384 respondents in a Korean cafe. Multi-linear regression was applied to obtain the influence of service quality, food quality and atmosphere dimensions on the purchase intention. They concluded that atmosphere and food quality have a positive influence on purchase intention, while there was none such relationship between assurance dimension and purchase intention. Fandos and Flavian [44] examined the relationship between internal and external attributes of quality, loyalty and purchase intent and found that increasing the perceived quality of external attributes increased the number of repeated purchases. In three large well-known multinational fast-food stores in Faisalabad and Lahore in Pakistan, a total of 276 respondents gave answers as to the motives of their purchases. They confirmed the overall impact of service quality on the intention to purchase. Maciejewski and Mokrysz [45] found that the main trends that determine consumer behavior are naturalness and sustainability, health and nutrition, multisensory experience, convenience, digitization and individualization. Coffee sellers will also want to influence the choices and preferences of coffee consumers by supporting and developing such trends [46][47][48]. Sammogia et al. [49] gave results that showed consumers have pronounced emotions when consuming coffee. Socio-economic characteristics have a limited effect on perceived emotions and consumption motives. Spence et al. [50] investigated the impact of a multisensory atmosphere on the drinking experience, and found that the visual, auditory, olfactory and tactile aspects of the environment influenced the experience of tasting and drinking coffee. On a total sample of 358 adult respondents, Steptoe et al. [51] found that there are nine factors or motivators in food selection: health, mood, comfort, sensory attraction, natural content, price, weight control, closeness and ethical concern. In their research Chen et al. [52] indicated the results that attitude, subjective norms and perceived control of consumer behavior have a significant positive effect on the intention to buy. In addition, utilitarian and hedonic values have a significant positive impact on purchase intent; both utilitarian and hedonic values have a mediating effect on attitude, subjective norms, perceived control of behavior and intention to buy. Kim et al. [53] examined TPB’s power to predict consumer intentions to choose organic restaurant products. The results suggest that decision-making models, such as TPB, include expected emotions. Yazdanpanah and Forouzani [54] used the theory of planned behavior (TPB) to examine the relationship between attitude and action. The results showed that attitude is the main predictor of intention to buy organic food, which may also indicate predictors about consumer choices and habits regarding coffee consumption. Further indicating the importance of behavioral theories, many significant studies indicate that consumer behavior in the tourism and catering market are primarily influenced by demographic factors [55][56].

References

  1. Lentijo, G.M.; Hostetler, M. Evaluating certified coffee programs. Sustainability 2011, 15, 199–223.
  2. De Neto Dão Pedro, C.; Gonot-Schoupinsky Xavier, P.; Gonot-Schoupinsky, F.N. Coffee as a Naturally Beneficial and Sustainable Ingredient in Personal Care Products: A Systematic Scoping Review of the Evidence. Front. Sustain. 2021, 2, 87.
  3. International Coffe Organization. Available online: https://www.ico.org/ (accessed on 5 May 2022).
  4. Gajić, T.; Radovanović, M.; Tretiakova, T.; Syromiatnikova, J. Creating brand confidence to gastronomic consumers through social networks–a report from Novi Sad. J. Place Manag. Dev. 2020, 14, 32–42.
  5. Blešić, I.; Petrović, M.D.; Gajić, T.; Tretiakova, T.N.; Syromiatnikova, J.A.; Radovanović, M.; Popov-Raljić, J.; Yakovenko, N.V. How the Extended Theory of Planned Behavior Can be Applied in the Research of the Influencing Factors of Food Waste in Restaurants: Learning from Serbian Urban Centers. Sustainability 2021, 13, 9236.
  6. Consumers International. Available online: https://www.consumersinternational.org/ (accessed on 5 May 2022).
  7. Vermeir, I.; Verbeke, W. Sustainable food consumption: Exploring the consumer “attitude–behavioral intention” gap. J. Agric. Environ. Ethics 2006, 19, 169–194.
  8. Williamson, G.; Dionisi, F.; Renouf, M. Flavanols from green tea and phenolic acids from coffee: Critical quantitative evaluation of the pharmacokinetic data in humans after consumption of single doses of beverages. Mol. Nutr. Food Res. 2011, 55, 864–873.
  9. Dodamgoda, N.; Amarasinghe, K. The Impact of Sensory Branding on Consumer Preference of Coffee Shops in Colombo. J. Bus. Manag. 2019, 21, 21–31.
  10. Sörqvist, P.; Hedblom, D.; Holmgren, M.; Haga, A.; Langeborg, L.; Nöstl, A.; Kågström, J. Who needs cream and sugar when there is eco-labeling? Taste and willingness to pay for “eco-friendly” coffee. PLoS ONE 2013, 8, e80719.
  11. Cailleba, P.; Casteran, H. Do ethical values work? A quantitative study on the impact of Fair Trade coffee on consumer behavior. J. Bus. Ethics 2010, 97, 613–624.
  12. Carrington, M.J.; Neville, B.A.; Whitwell, G.J. Why ethical consumers don’t walk their talk: Towards a framework for understanding the gap between the ethical purchase intentions and actual buying behavior of ethically minded consumers. J. Bus. Ethics 2010, 97, 139–158.
  13. Harvard Health Publishing, Harvard Medical School. Available online: https://www.health.harvard.edu/ (accessed on 1 April 2022).
  14. Lee, S.Y.; Jung, G.; Jang, M.J.; Suh, M.W.; Lee, J.H.; Oh, S.H.; Park, M.K. Association of coffee consumption with hearing and tinnitus based on a national population-based survey. Nutrients 2018, 10, 1429.
  15. Haller, S.; Montandon, M.L.; Rodriguez, C.; Herrmann, F.R.; Giannakopoulos, P. Impact of coffee, wine, and chocolate consumption on cognitive outcome and MRI parameters in old age. Nutrients 2018, 10, 1391.
  16. Yaya, I.; Marcellin, F.; Costa, M.; Morlat, P.; Protopopescu, C.; Pialoux, G.; Santos, M.E.; Wittkop, L.; Esterle, L.; Gervais, A. Impact of alcohol and coffee intake on the risk of advanced liver fibrosis: A longitudinal analysis in hiv-hcv coinfected patients. Nutrients 2018, 10, 705.
  17. Van Dijk, R.; Ties, D.; Kuijpers, D.; Van der Harst, P.; Oudkerk, M. Effects of caffeine on myocardial blood flow: A systematic review. Nutrients 2018, 10, 1083.
  18. Bae, J.H.; Park, J.H.; Im, S.S.; Song, D.K. Coffee and Health. Integr. Med. Res. 2014, 3, 189–191.
  19. Leviton, A. Biases inherent in studies of coffee consumption in early pregnancy and the risks of subsequent events. Nutrients 2018, 10, 1152.
  20. Barnung, R.; Nøst, T.; Ulven, S.M.; Skeie, G.; Olsen, K. Coffee consumption and whole-blood gene expression in the norwegian women and cancer post-genome cohort. Nutrients 2018, 10, 1047.
  21. Poole, R.; Kennedy, O.J.; Roderick, P.; Fallowfield, J.A.; Hayes, P.C.; Parkes, J. Coffee consumption and health: Umbrella review of meta-analyses of multiple health outcomes. BMJ 2017, 359, j5024.
  22. Nehlig, A. Effects of coffee/caffeine on brain health and disease: What should I tell my patients? Pract. Neurol. 2016, 16, 89–95.
  23. Franco, R.; Oñatibia-Astibia, A.; Martínez-Pinilla, E. Health benefits of methylxanthines in cacao and chocolate. Nutrients 2013, 5, 4159–4173.
  24. Wong, A.; Sohal, A. A critical incident approach to the examination of customer relationship management in a retail chain: An exploratory study. Qual. Mark. Res. Int. J. 2003, 6, 248–262.
  25. Zhang, Q.; Prasongsukarn, K. A relationship study of price promotion, customer quality evaluation, customer satisfaction, and repurchase intention: A case study of Starbucks in Thailand. Int. J. Manag. Appl. Sci. 2017, 3, 29–32. Available online: http://www.iraj.in/journal/journal_file/journal_pdf/14-407-151151883929-32.pdf (accessed on 3 February 2022).
  26. Mărcuţă, L.; Mărcuţă, A.; Mârzab, B. Modern Tendencies in Changing the Consumers’ Preferences. In Proceedings of the 21st International Economic Conference 2014, IECS 2014, Sibiu, Romania, 16–17 May 2014. Procedia Econ. Financ. 2014, 16, 535–539.
  27. Suki, N.M. Subscribers Intention Towards Using 3G Mobile Services. J. Econ. Behav. Stud. 2011, 2, 67–75.
  28. Gajić, T.; Raljić Popov, J.; Aleksić, M.; Blešić, I.; Vukolić, D.; Petrović, M.D.; Yakovenko, N.V.; Sikimić, V. Creating Opportunities for the Development of Craft Beer Tourism in Serbia as a New Form of Sustainable Tourism. Sustainability 2021, 13, 8730.
  29. Gajić, T.; Petrović, D.M.; Blešić, I.; Radovanović, M.; Syromjatnikowa, J. The Power of Fears in the Travel Decisions: COVID-19 vs. Lack of Money. J. Tour. Futures 2021, 1–22.
  30. Gajić, T.; Petrović, D.; Radovanović, M.; Vuković, D.; Yakovenko, N.V. Women’s Role in Organizational Commitment and Job Satisfaction in the Travel Industry–An Evidence From the Urban Setting. Sustainability 2021, 13, 8395.
  31. Ajzen, I. The theory of planned behavior. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Processes 1991, 50, 179–211.
  32. Geel, L.; Kinnear, M.; Kock, H.L. Relating consumer preferences to sensory attributes of instant coffee. Food Qual. Prefer. 2005, 16, 237–244.
  33. Huang, Y.F.; Dang, H.S. An Empirical Analysis on Purchase Intention on Coffee Beverage in Taiwan, European. J. Bus. Manag. 2014, 6, 182–196.
  34. Hassan, H.; Hashimi, M.S.; Sarwar, Z. Exploring the Impact of retail Stores’ Service Quality on Consumers’ Purchase Intention: The Moderating Role of CSR. Middle-East J. Sci. Res. 2014, 19, 505–520.
  35. Gonibala, R.Q.; Tumewu, F. The Effect of Store Atmosphere and Peer Pressure on Purchase Intention at Housepitality Café and Restaurant. J. EMBA 2018, 6, 2638–2647.
  36. Parks-Leduc, L.; Feldman, G.; Bardi, A. Personality Traits and Personal Values: A Meta-Analysis. Personal. Soc. Psychol. Rev. 2014, 19, 3–29.
  37. Ágoston, C.; Urbán, R.; Király, O.; Griffiths, M.D.; Rogers, P.; Demetrovics, Z. Why Do You Drink Caffeine? The Development of the Motives for Caffeine Consumption Questionnaire (MCCQ) and Its Relationship with Gender, Age and the Types of Caffeinated Beverages. Int. J. Ment. Health Addict. 2017, 16, 981–999.
  38. Li, B.; Hayesab, J.E.; Ziegle, G.R. Interpreting consumer preferences: Physicohedonic and psychohedonic models yield different information in a coffee-flavored dairy beverage. Food Qual. Prefer. 2014, 36, 27–32.
  39. Chin, M.L.; Ri, J.F.; Chung, C.H.; Ya, P.H.; Yun, H.C.; Yu, C.L.; Ya, H.C. Factors Affect College Students Intention to Purchase StarbucksCafé Products. Int. J. Bus. Manag. 2016, 4, 262–267.
  40. Barahona, I.; Mauricio, E.; Jaimes, S.; Yang, J.B. Sensory attributes of coffee beverages and their relation to price and package information: A case study of Colombian customers’ preferences. Food Sci. Nutr. 2020, 8, 1173–1186.
  41. Anssi, T.; Sanna, S. Subjective Norms, Attitudes and Intention of Finish Consumers in Buying Organic Food. Br. Food J. 2005, 107, 808–822.
  42. Cardello. Food quality: Relativity, context and consumer expectations. Food Qual. Prefer. 1995, 6, 163–170.
  43. Wandebori, H.; Wijaya, V. Consumers’ Purchase Intention: Influencing Factors unveiled at Korean Thematic Café Case Study: Chingu Café. J. Bus. Manag. 2017, 18, 73–82.
  44. Fandos, C.; Flavian, C. Intrinsic and Extrinsic Quality Attributes, Loyalty, and Buying Intention: An Analysis For a PDO Product. Br. Food J. 2006, 108, 646–662.
  45. Maciejewski, G.; Mokrysz, S. New Trends in Consumption on the Coffee Market. Polityki Eur. Finans. Mark. 2020, 22, 132–144.
  46. Casal, S.; Alves, M.R.; Mendes, E.; Oliveira, M.; Ferreira, M. Discrimination between Arabica and Robusta Coffee Species on the Basis of Their Amino Acid Enantiomers. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2003, 51, 6495–6501.
  47. Popov Raljić, J. Sensory Analysis of Food and Beverages; Department of Geography, Tourism and Hospitality, Faculty of Science, University of Novi Sad: Novi Sad, Serbia, 2013.
  48. Tucker, C.M. Coffee Culture: Local Experiences, Global Connections; Routledge: London, UK, 2017.
  49. Samoggia, A.; Del Prete, M.; Argenti, C. Functional Needs, Emotions, and Perceptions of Coffee Consumers and Non-Consumers. Sustainability 2020, 12, 5694.
  50. Spence, C.; Carvalho, F.M. The coffee drinking experience: Product extrinsic (atmospheric) influences on taste and choice. Food Qual. Prefer. 2020, 80, 103802.
  51. Steptoe, A.; Pollard, T.; Wardle, J. Development of a Measure of the Motives Underlying the Selection of Food: The Food Choice Questionnaire. Appetite 1995, 25, 267–284.
  52. Chen, H.S.; Liang, C.H.; Liao, S.Y.; Kuo, H.Y. Consumer Attitudes and Purchase Intentions toward Food Delivery Platform Services. Sustainability 2020, 12, 10177.
  53. Kim, Y.J.; Njite, D.; Hancer, M. Anticipated emotions in consumer’s intentions to select eco-friendly restaurants: Augmenting the theory of planned behavior. International. J. Hosp. Manag. 2013, 34, 255–262.
  54. Yazdanpanah, M.; Forouzani, M. Application of the Theory of Planned Behaviour to predict Iranian students’ intention to purchase organic food. J. Clean. Prod. 2015, 107, 342–352.
  55. Florido-Benıtez, L. International mobile marketing: A satisfactory concept for companies and users in times of pandemic. Benchmarking Int. J. 2022, 29, 1826–1856.
  56. Florido-Benıtez, L. The Influence of Demographic and Situational Characteristics in Satisfaction and Decisions in Tourism Activities Via Mobile Marketing. Cuad. Tur. 2016, 38, 529–532.
More
© Text is available under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy.
Upload a video for this entry
Information
Subjects: Behavioral Sciences
Contributors MDPI registered users' name will be linked to their SciProfiles pages. To register with us, please refer to https://encyclopedia.pub/register :
Tamara Gajić
,
Jovanka Popov Raljić
,
Ivana Blešić
,
Milica Aleksić
,
Marko D. Petrović
,
Milan M. Radovanović
,
Darko B. Vuković
,
Višnja Sikimić
,
Tatjana Pivac
,
Marija Kostić
,
Dejan Sekulić
,
Dragan Vukolić
,
Mirjana Penić
,
Olja Munitlak Ivanović
View Times: 443
Revisions: 2 times (View History)
Update Date: 22 Sep 2022
Table of Contents
    1000/1000
    Hot Most Recent
    Video Production Service
    Feedback