| Popis: |
(1) Background: As biofortified fish meat is becoming increasingly available, the use of supplements within fish feed may impact consumers’ perceptions and their willingness to pay (WTP) for the product. This study focused on evaluating the sensory liking of, and WTP for, fish produced with fortified feed while understanding the role played by the acquired information on fish fortification. (2) Methods: Hedonic ratings and WTP were measured in an experimental bid. The participants (n = 91) were asked to rate pleasantness and WTP during two different rounds: (i) appearance–information–tasting and (ii) appearance–tasting–information. A total of three fish species (carp, seabream, and trout) were presented to the consumers as being either fortified (with iodine, selenium, and omega-3 fatty acids) or conventional products. (3) Results: For pleasantness, no significant differences were found between the fortified and conventional fish. In contrast, substantial differences emerged when information regarding the products was provided. Providing the relevant information before tasting affected how much the consumers liked the conventional fish, resulting in a preference for it over the fortified fish. Additionally, consumers are willing to pay more for fortified fish, especially when information with respect to fortification is available. Nevertheless, when information about fortification was provided before tasting, the consumer’s expectations were not fulfilled. (4) Conclusions: The outcomes of this study clearly indicate that the presence of relevant information impacts how much people like fortified versus conventional fish, as well as their WTP. |
