Abstract
In order to understand the structure of food image for “feeling appetite” when user sees the image, words related to “appetite” were extracted experimentally and clustered based on human information processing. Five scale evaluation for 33 items in four clusters, they are “feeling”, “first impression”, “estimation by vision”, “image of the meal scene”, were carried out. The result is obtained that “cool”, “fresh”, “healthy” are not influent to “appetite”.
You have full access to this open access chapter, Download conference paper PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Keywords
1 Introduction
By product ordering duties at retail store like convenience store, a salesclerk with ordering authority orders while watching an order terminals. In case that kinds of products are foods, if a product image is an image feeling that a salesclerk would like to eat it, he/she would like to order this product positively. To do it like that, what should provider of photographs do for them? [1,2,3] There are many factors from the view point of information design, they are, layout of screen interface, character color and font, so on. As a part of fundamental research about information design of sizzle image, representation of appetite by food image are studied.
Appetite like sizzler is defined as “advertising photograph of food or drink which stimulates feel of desire for food or drink. Sense which appeal their daintiness and freshness to customers” by Japanese dictionary [4]. To consider appetite by food image displayed on an order terminal, the effect to which salesclerk’s order is encouraged could expect.
The objective of this research is to extract evaluation items to assess appetite by food product image. To achieve this objective, two experiments were carried out. Experiment 1 tried to extract word sample to represent difference between images which feels appetite and images which not feel appetite. By using the samples extracted from this experiment, a list of evaluation items were developed by grouping same meaning words according to the descriptive evaluation method defined by JIS-Z9080 [5]. Experiment 2 was carried out by using these evaluation items and extracted items that evaluation results were different between two kinds of images, they were images which feels appetite and images which not feel appetite.
2 Experiment 1
Totally 33 graduate and undergraduate students were participated in this experiment. They are all normal and corrected normal vision.
22 images of food and drink which sold in general convenience store were used as stimulus images to show. Their breakdown were eleven kinds of food advertising pictures and food catalog pictures, respectively. The former defined images which feels appetite, the latter defined images which not feel appetite. Eleven kinds of foods were “Cheese hamburger”, “Chinese rice bowl”, “Iced coffee”, “Meat doria”, “Shrimp doria”, “Japanese dumplings”, “Spaghetti with meat sauce”, “Melon bread”, “Spaghetti with bacon and mushroom”, “Cold noodle” and “Salad”.
This experiment was carried out in the laboratory without windows. The environment condition such as illuminance in the laboratory was kept constantly. The participants evaluated independently. Choose one of eleven kinds of foods, both food advertising picture and catalog picture were shown to a participants. They were required to describe words that they hit on to sticky about the difference correspond catalog pictures to advertising picture. Time limit does not set. The experiment closed that the participants judged that they took out words up. During the experiment, experimenter waited outside of the experiment room.
3 Grouping Words
From the results, 350 words could be collected. The objective of this section is to make evaluation items to be able to assess appetite using word samples collected in the experiment 1. To achieve this, grouping used collected word samples was carried out according to the descriptive test method in JIS-Z9080 without considering difference of foods and gender of observers.
3.1 Method
The task of grouping was carried out through discussing six experimenters related to this research. Using sticky with evaluation words, grouping was performed every word which means the same contents.
3.2 Result
Finally, 37 groups were made by using 280 words shown in Table 1. During the discussion, the words do not related to appetite were not used in the analysis. They are about the way to take a photo (e.g. position of a camera, light condition, beauty) and so on.
4 Experiment 2
The objective of this experiment is to verify that each item of evaluation word list made in Sect. 3 is suite for evaluating appetite by food image. To achieve this, evaluation items which are able to evaluate the difference between two images (they are images which feels appetite and images which not feel appetite) were tried to extract by evaluating these images using each item.
4.1 Experimental Method
Ten graduate and under graduate students who did not join the experiment 1 participated in this experiment. They are all normal and corrected normal vision. 33 evaluation items listed on Table 1 which were extracted based on 37 items obtained by Sect. 3 were used. Procedure of extraction is shown below.
Firstly, “yearning”, “calm” and “elegant” were deleted from the evaluation items because the number of samples of each item is only one, respectively. Remained 34 items were classified into four groups, that is “sense”, “first impression”, “estimation by vision” and “beautiful”, and “looks tasty”, “satisfaction” and “friendly” were classified into “delicious”, “satisfaction” and “friendly” were classified into total evaluation. Lastly, about “good scent” and “grilled flavor” classified in “estimation by vision”, the latter was deleted because meaning of these two words were similar. From these procedure, 33 items were listed shown in Table 2.
The experimental environment was same as experiment 1. The evaluation item in Table 2 was lined up in turn, five step scale was located on the side of each item [6]. Evaluations were carried out by participant’s own pace without time limit. The participant was required not to think too deeply and to judge by the intuition as much as possible. During the experiment, experimenter waited outside of the experiment room.
4.2 Results and Discussions
From the results of evaluation data by using 33 items, average and standard deviations of evaluation data from 10 participants by each food image were calculated. Parts of results about “sense” were shown in Figs. 1 and 2, parts of results about “estimation by vision” were shown in Figs. 3, 4 and 5, and parts of results about “total evaluation” were shown in Figs. 6 and 7.
To extract items which shows the difference between images feel appetite (food advertising picture) and images not feel appetite (catalog pictures), t-test using average data between two conditions were carried out. From the results, two items (“warm”, “bright”) have significant difference, they were, (t(20) = 2.25, p < .05) and (t(20) = 4.12, p < .05), respectively.
There is no significant difference in all items in “cool” (t(20) = 1.67, ns). In “first impression”, except “invigorating” (t(20) = 1.08, ns) and “young and vivacious” (t(20) = 1.08, ns), there are all significant difference. About “estimation by vision”, nine items have significant difference (e.g. “newly made (t(20) = 5.37, p < .05), “hand made” (t(20) = 4.87, p < .05)).
About “total evaluation”, all three items have significant difference (“looks tasty” (t(20) = 6.06, p < .05), “satisfaction” (t(20) = 4.38, p < .05), “friendly” (t(20) = 3.67, p < .05))
24 items which have significant difference between conditions got higher evaluation value for images feel appetite (food advertising picture) than images not feel appetite (catalog pictures). From this, these 24 evaluation items could evaluate “feel appetite”.
Osgood [7, 8] described that there were three universal axes for evaluating things, they were “activity”, “evaluation” and “potency”. The rightest column in Table 3. Shows the results of applying these three words to evaluation items. From this, almost words were classified to “activity” or “evaluation”. There was few “potency” because the objects of this time were related to food. So, the evaluation items obtained this research was validate from the view point of evaluating things.
5 Conclusion
From the results obtained through the experiments, evaluation items for “feel appetite” could be narrowed down 24 items shown in Table 3. By using these items for evaluating food image, “feel appetite” is expected to evaluate.
To generalize these scale in the future, it is necessary to assess validity of these 24 items. As a concrete procedure, it is considered to verify the relationship between appetite by food image and score of 24 evaluation items through evaluation experiment using various food image not using this time experiments and to clarify the structure of “feel appetite” factors by extracting common factors between evaluation items using statistical methods. As there is a research to develop a method for representing “feel appetite” physically [3], quantification the relationship between physical value and psychological value of “feel appetite” could be expected.
This time, photography experience of participants and view point of photography were unknown. These factors are efficient for evaluation results, and angle of photography and background design are also efficient for evaluation results. So, experimental condition should be clarified.
To the future, an evaluation method of “feel appetite” could be established for verifying validity of evaluation items by trying additional experiment or additional analysis.
References
Arce−Lopera, C., Masuda, T., Kimura, A., Wada, Y., Okajima, K.: Luminance distribution modifies the perceived freshness of strawberries. i−Perception 3(5), 338–355 (2012)
Pneau, S., Brockoff, P., Escher, E., Nuessli, J.: A comprehensive approach to evaluate the freshness of strawberries and carrots. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 45(1), 20–29 (2007)
Wada, Y., Arce−Lopera, C., Masuda, T., Kimura, A., Dan, I., Goto, S., Tsuzuki, D., Okajima, K.: Influence of luminance distribution on the appetizingly fresh appearance of cabbage. Appetite 54(2), 363–368 (2010)
http://dictionary.goo.ne.jp/jn/257519/meaning/m0u/, 14 July 2016. (in Japanese)
JIS-Z9080: Sensory analysis-Methodology (2004). (in Japanese)
Osgood, C.E.: The nature and measurement of meaning. Psychol. Bull. 49(3), 197–237 (1952)
Osgood, C.E., Suci, F.J., Tannenbaum, P.H.: The Measurement of Meaning. University of Illinois Press, Urbana (1957). http://amzn.to/2jpxRBS
Osgood, C.E.: Semantic differential technique in the comparative study of cultures. Am. Anthopologist 66, 171–200 (1964)
Sakurai, K., et al.: Generation method of image with appetite, Technical report of IEICE, vol. 114(409), pp. 39–44 (2015). (in Japanese). SO9241-210: Human-centred design for interactive systems
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Fukuzumi, S., Watanabe, N., Kasamatsu, K., Kiso, H., Jingu, H. (2017). Influence of “Feel Appetite” by Food Image. In: Yamamoto, S. (eds) Human Interface and the Management of Information: Supporting Learning, Decision-Making and Collaboration. HIMI 2017. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 10274. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-58524-6_46
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-58524-6_46
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-58523-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-58524-6
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)