| Literature DB >> 35159604 |
Neusa Jessen1,2,3, Albertino Damasceno1,2,3,4, Patrícia Padrão1,2,5, Nuno Lunet1,2,4.
Abstract
Excess sodium (Na) consumption is implicated in several health problems, particularly hypertension, and bread is an important dietary source. We aimed to analyze perception of salt, acceptability, and purchase intention of low-salt and unsalted white bread by consumers in Mozambique. Sensory evaluation was performed using a triangular test (N = 42) to perceive if differences in saltiness were detected when comparing low-salt and unsalted with salt-reduced white bread. Nine-point hedonic and five-point purchase intention scales were used to measure acceptability and purchase intention, respectively (N = 120). Difference in saltiness was not detected when fresh white bread with 282 mg Na/100 g vs. 231 mg Na/100 g and 279 mg Na/100 g vs. 123 mg Na/100 g were compared. Difference in saltiness was not detected when comparing unsalted vs. 64 mg Na/100 g, while differences were detected when unsalted vs. 105 mg Na/100 g and unsalted vs. 277 mg Na/100 g were compared. Overall acceptability and purchase intention were not affected by reductions of Na in bread. A reduction of up to more than 50% of Na was not perceived and a small level of Na was not distinguished from unsalted bread. Consumers were shown to accept and be willing to buy both unsalted and salt-reduced bread, suggesting that Na can be reduced from current levels.Entities:
Keywords: Mozambique; acceptability; bread; perception; purchase intention; salt; sensory evaluation; sodium
Year: 2022 PMID: 35159604 PMCID: PMC8834232 DOI: 10.3390/foods11030454
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Foods ISSN: 2304-8158
Tests performed and sociodemographic characteristics of participants.
| Test Applied | Difference Testing * | Acceptability Testing | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Experiment Performed | Salt Reduction | Salt Increase | Different Salt Leves (High) | Different Salt Leves (Low) | |||
| Day of experiment | # 1 | # 2 | # 3 | # 4 | # 5 | # 6 | # 7 |
| Na concetrations tested | 282 → 231 | 279 → 123 | 0 → 64 | 0 → 105 | 0 → 277 | 292 vs. 215 vs. 173 | 77 vs. 59 vs. 0 |
| Participants (N) | 42 | 42 | 42 | 42 | 42 | 120 | 120 |
| Female (%) | 50% | 50% | 52.4% | 50% | 50% | 55.8% | 53.3% |
| Age, mean years (SD) | 46 (11.2) | 45 (12.3) | 46 (11.3) | 45 (12.1) | 46 (11.4) | 41 (10.6) | 43 (11.0) |
| Level of education < 9 † (%) | 47.6% | 50% | 50% | 50% | 50% | 38.3% | 48.3% |
SD, standard deviation; * Triangular test; † Years of school completed.
Figure 1Results from difference testing; 14-number of correct answers by chance; 19-maximum number of correct answers until statistical significance.
Comparison of correct answers in difference testing and scores of acceptability and purchase intention testing, according to demographic variables.
| Gender | Age (Years Old) | Level of Education * | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Test | Female | Male |
| 18–44 | ≥45 |
| <9 | ≥9 |
|
| Difference † (n/N) ‡ | |||||||||
| 282 vs. 231 | 9/21 | 6/21 | 0.334 | 8/21 | 7/21 | 0.747 | 5/20 | 10/22 | 0.167 |
| 279 vs. 123 | 8/21 | 9/21 | 0.753 | 9/21 | 8/21 | 0.753 | 11/21 | 6/21 | 0.116 |
| 105 vs. 0 | 12/21 | 8/21 | 0.217 | 14/21 | 6/21 | 0.013 | 7/21 | 13/21 | 0.064 |
| 64 vs. 0 | 10/22 | 5/20 | 0.167 | 6/21 | 9/21 | 0.334 | 8/21 | 7/21 | 0.747 |
| 277 vs. 0 | 10/21 | 12/21 | 0.537 | 10/21 | 12/21 | 0.537 | 11/21 | 11/21 | 1.000 |
| Acceptability [Mean score (SD)] | |||||||||
| 292 | 6.52 (1.75) | 6.21 (2.15) | 0.615 | 6.38 (1.94) | 6.36 (1.98) | 0.966 | 6.57 (1.87) | 6.27 (1.99) | 0.643 |
| 215 | 6.16 (1.70) | 6.00 (1.77) | 0.778 | 6.29 (1.51) | 5.67 (2.10) | 0.299 | 5.63 (1.93) | 6.42 (1.50) | 0.153 |
| 173 | 5.71 (1.87) | 6.47 (1.68) | 0.187 | 5.96 (1.91) | 6.29 (1.64) | 0.594 | 6.56 (1.46) | 5.57 (1.96) | 0.166 |
| 77 | 6.00 (1.61) | 5.47 (2.29) | 0.403 | 5.60 (2.09) | 5.90 (1.86) | 0.634 | 5.65 (2.01) | 5.85 (1.95) | 0.751 |
| 59 | 6.27 (1.48) | 5.00 (2.09) | 0.030 | 6.08 (1.44) | 5.07 (2.34) | 0.098 | 5.53 (2.06) | 5.86 (1.71) | 0.583 |
| 0 | 5.71 (2.28) | 5.79 (2.39) | 0.919 | 5.75 (2.36) | 5.75 (2.29) | 1.000 | 5.84 (2.41) | 5.67 (2.27) | 0.814 |
| Purchase intention [Mean score (SD)] | |||||||||
| 292 | 4.09 (0.89) | 3.89 (1.15) | 0.539 | 4.19 (0.85) | 3.64 (1.22) | 0.102 | 3.71 (1.20) | 4.15 (0.88) | 0.194 |
| 215 | 3.50 (1.41) | 4.07 (1.16) | 0.202 | 3.64 (1.34) | 3.91 (1.38) | 0.583 | 3.87 (1.25) | 3.63 (1.41) | 0.589 |
| 173 | 3.38 (1.49) | 3.95 (1.31) | 0.213 | 3.88 (1.48) | 3.21 (1.25) | 0.158 | 3.62 (1.15) | 3.67 (1.61) | 0.929 |
| 77 | 3.95 (1.07) | 3.26 (1.09) | 0.052 | 3.70 (0.98) | 3.55 (1.28) | 0.679 | 3.55 (1.23) | 3.70 (1.03) | 0.679 |
| 59 | 4.05 (1.21) | 3.50 (1.20) | 0.164 | 3.92 (1.19) | 3.60 (1.30) | 0.430 | 3.68 (1.42) | 3.90 (1.04) | 0.576 |
| 0 | 3.81 (1.37) | 3.68 (1.42) | 0.777 | 3.71 (1.46) | 3.81 (1.28) | 0.818 | 3.58 (1.39) | 3.90 (1.38) | 0.461 |
SD, standard deviation; * Years of school completed; † Triangular testing (n = 19 is the maximum number of correct identifications until statistical significance); ‡ Number of correct answers/total.
Figure 2Mean scores for acceptability and purchase intention testing.