Fruit and Vegetable Quality

quality (Steenkamp, 1989) and the quality formation process (Poulsen
et al., 1996). Furthermore, the expectation-disconfirmation framework
recently discussed by Oliver (1997) is also related to the model.
As we aim at meeting or exceeding consumers’ expectation a dis-
cussion of the relationship between the Total Food Quality Model and
the expectation-disconfirmation model follows.
In the expectation-disconfirmation framework the overall satisfac-
tion/dissatisfaction is a function of the expectations and their disconfir-
mation. In the assimilation process we have a direct effect of the
expectations and the experienced quality approaches expectations, even
though a difference is perceived. This is the main process in the case of
minor differences between expected and experienced quality. Alterna-
tively, the contrast processmay occur. In this case the expectations are
thoroughly disconfirmed. High expectations that have not been fulfilled
will result in an even lower evaluation of the product than if expecta-
tions had been lower, and vice versa. Hence exceeding consumers’ ex-
pectations corresponds to a positive contrast effect. The assimilation
process has been illustrated by numerous examples but not the contrast
effect (Oliver, 1997).
Five submodels of the Total Food Quality Model are illustrated in
Poulsen et al. (1996). The pure assimilation processcorresponds to the
expectation-only sub-model, while the pure contrast process corre-
sponds to an experience-only submodel. Furthermore, three models in-
clude the effects of both expectations and experience, the full model (as
illustrated in Figure 11.1), the intervening model (as illustrated in Fig-
ure 11.1 without the dotted arrow) and the additive model. Exceeding
consumer expectations corresponds to one of these three submodels with
positive coefficients.
The constructs in Total Food Quality Model may be considered as la-
tent and should each be represented by measurable manifest variables at
the attribute level. This again gives rise to various model combinations,
which, however, are outside the scope of this chapter. Nevertheless, it
is important to stress that a model at the attribute level implies that the
consumer’s expectations of some attributes can be fulfilled at the same
time as others are experienced as disappointing. A simple example is a
product whose taste satisfies the customer, but where the packaging does
not and Cardello (1994) points out that the consumer can have expec-
tations of both specific sensory experiences and of how the product in
general will live up to expectations. Examples of various subsets of the
Total Food Quality model are given by Grunert et al. (1996). The model

204 HOUSE OF QUALITY—AN INTEGRATED VIEW