Consumer Perception of the Quality of Lamb and Lamb Confit
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
3. Results
3.1. Characterization of the Sample
3.2. Types of Consumers
3.3. Willingness to Pay
4. Discussion
4.1. Types of Consumers
4.2. Importance of Intrinsic and Extrinsic Attributes
4.3. Willingness to Pay
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Plummer, J.T. Concept and application of life style segmentation. J. Mark. 1974, 38, 33–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brunsø, K.; Grunert, K.G. Development and testing of a cross-culturally valid instrument: Food-related life style. Adv. Consum. Res. 1995, 22, 475–480. [Google Scholar]
- Bernués, A.; Olaizola, A.; Corcoran, K. Extrinsic attributes of red meat as indicators of quality in Europe: An application for market segmentation. Food Qual. Prefer. 2003, 14, 265–276. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bernués, A.; Ripoll, G.; Panea, B. Consumer segmentation based on convenience orientation and attitudes towards quality attributes of lamb meat. Food Qual. Prefer. 2012, 26, 211–220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- De Boer, M.; McCarthy, M.; Cowan, C.; Ryan, I. The influence of lifestyle characteristics and beliefs about convenience food on the demand for convenience foods in the Irish market. Food Qual. Prefer. 2004, 15, 155–165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- MERCASA. Alimentación en España 2015. Producción, Industria, Distribución y Consumo; MERCASA: Madrid, Spain, 2016; p. 552. [Google Scholar]
- Ripoll-Bosch, R.; Ripoll, G.; Álvarez-Rodríguez, J.; Blasco, I.; Panea, B.; Joy, M. Efecto del sexo y la explotación sobre la calidad de la canal y de la carne del cordero lechal de raza ojinegra. ITEA Inf. Tec. Econ. Agrar. 2012, 108, 522–536. [Google Scholar]
- MARM. Estudio de Mercado Observatorio del Consumo y la Distribución Distribución Alimentaria. Available online: http://www.mapama.gob.es/es/alimentacion/temas/consumo-y-comercializacion-y-distribucion-alimentaria/informe_10_tcm30-128614.pdf (accessed on 21 May 2018).
- Grunert, K. Future trends and consumer lifestyles with regard to meat consumption. Meat Sci. 2006, 74, 149–160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Cotes, A. Modelos de Comportamiento del Consumidor de Productos Alimenticios Con Valor Agregado; Universidad de Salamanca: Salamanca, Spain, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Gracia, A. Consumers’ attitudes towards designation of origin lamb meat: Segmentation and profiles. ITEA Inf. Tec. Econ. Agrar. 2005, 101, 25–44. [Google Scholar]
- Arcia, P.L. Influencia de Las Caracteristicas Sensoriales y la Información Nutricional en la Respuesta de Los Consumidores a Alimentos Funcionales; CSIC: Valencia, Spain, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Gracia, A. Comportamiento del Consumidor de Carne de Cordero con Igp en Aragón; AgEcon Search: Zaragoza, Spain, 2005; p. 132. [Google Scholar]
- Bredahl, L.; Grunert, K.G. Identificación de los estilos de vida alimenticios en españa. Investig. Agrar. Econ. 1997, 12, 247–263. [Google Scholar]
- Buckley, M.; Cowan, C.; McCarthy, M. The convenience food market in Great Britain: Convenience food lifestyle (CFL) segments. Appetite 2007, 49, 600–617. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Grunert, K.G.; Perrea, T.; Zhou, Y.; Huang, G.; Sorensen, B.T.; Krystallis, A. Is food-related lifestyle (FRL) able to reveal food consumption patterns in non-western cultural environments? Its adaptation and application in urban china. Appetite 2011, 56, 357–367. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Nie, C.; Zepeda, L. Lifestyle segmentation of us food shoppers to examine organic and local food consumption. Appetite 2011, 57, 28–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Good, L.K.; Huddleston, P. Ethnocentrism of polish and Russian consumers: Are feelings and intentions related. Int. Mark. Rev. 1995, 12, 35–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sharma, S.; Shimp, T.A.; Shin, J. Consumer ethnocentrism: A test of antecedents and moderators. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 1995, 23, 26–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Worsley, A.; Skrzypiec, G. Teenage vegetarianism: Prevalence, social and cognitive contexts. Appetite 1998, 30, 151–170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Forestell, C.A.; Spaeth, A.M.; Kane, S.A. To eat or not to eat red meat. A closer look at the relationship between restrained eating and vegetarianism in college females. Appetite 2012, 58, 319–325. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Larsson, C.L.; Klock, K.S.; Nordrehaug Åstrøm, A.; Haugejorden, O.; Johansson, G. Lifestyle-related characteristics of young low-meat consumers and omnivores in sweden and norway. J. Adolesc. Health 2002, 31, 190–198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bello, L.; Calvo, D. The importance of intrinsic and extrinsic cues to expected and experienced quality: An empirical application for beef. Food Qual. Prefer. 2000, 11, 229–238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dransfield, E.; Ngapo, T.M.; Nielsen, N.A.; Bredahl, L.; Sjödén, P.O.; Magnusson, M.; Campo, M.M.; Nute, G.R. Consumer choice and suggested price for pork as influenced by its appearance, taste and information concerning country of origin and organic pig production. Meat Sci. 2005, 69, 61–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Bernabéu, R.; Tendero, A. Preference structure for lamb meat consumers. A Spanish case study. Meat Sci. 2005, 71, 464–470. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Panea, B.; Ripoll, G.; Campo, M.M.; Albertí, P.; Bernués, A. Percepción del Consumidor Aragonés Sobre los Métodos de Producción y la Calidad Intrinseca y Extrínseca de la Carne de Cordero. In XXXVIII Congreso Nacional de la Sociedad Española de Ovinotecnia y Caprinotecnia; SEOC: Málaga, Spain, 2013; pp. 322–328. [Google Scholar]
- Dodds, W.B.; Monroe, K.B.; Grewal, D. Effects of price, brand, and store information on buyers’ product evaluations. J. Mark. Res. 1991, 28, 307–319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Banovic, M.; Grunert, K.G.; Barreira, M.M.; Fontes, M.A. Beef quality perception at the point of purchase: A study from portugal. Food Qual. Prefer. 2009, 20, 335–342. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Steenkamp, J.B.E.M.; Van Trijp, H.C.M. Quality guidance: A consumer-based approach to food quality improvement using partial least squares. Eur. Rev. Agric. Econ. 1996, 23, 195–215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Verbeke, W.; Vackier, I. Profile and effects of consumer involvement in fresh meat. Meat Sci. 2004, 67, 159–168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Xue, H.; Mainville, D.; You, W.; Nayga, R.M., Jr. Consumer preferences and willingness to pay for grass-fed beef: Empirical evidence from in-store experiments. Food Qual. Prefer. 2010, 21, 857–866. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gil, J.M.; Gracia, A.; Sánchez, M. Market segmentation and willingness to pay for organic products in Spain. Int. Food Agribus. Manag. Rev. 2000, 3, 207–226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
(B) Habits of the consumer at the time of cooking and eating 1 |
I like to cook |
I like foreign food |
At home, we prefer informal dinners |
I like going to restaurants with friends and family |
At home, everyone cooks |
I spend a lot of time cooking |
I like to eat |
I like changes in food |
Planning food is important for family nutrition |
Traditional recipes are best |
(C) Importance of extrinsic quality attributes of lamb 1 |
Lamb meat with a mark of quality is better |
Lamb is easy to cook |
The best lamb is grass-fed |
The Ojinegra de Teruel breed is better than others |
The price of lamb is very important |
The lamb from Aragon is better than others |
Organic lamb is better than others |
The best lamb is fed cereals |
(D) Importance of the intrinsic quality attributes of lamb meat at the time of purchase 2 |
Appearance of freshness |
Lamb category |
Light lamb category |
Light colored meat |
Age |
Breed |
Low fat |
(E) Other issues related to lifestyles |
Are you vegetarian? 3 |
Do you have any food restrictions for your religion? 3 |
Would you like to lose weight? 3 |
Is your cholesterol level high? 3 |
Do you live in a city? 3 |
Have you heard about the Ojinegra de Teruel breed? 3 |
Have you heard about lamb confit? 3 |
Have you ever eaten lamb confit? 3 |
If you have eaten lamb confit, where did you eat it? 4 |
How much would you be willing to pay for a can for four people of lamb confit preserved in ... 5
|
CL1 | CL2 | CL3 | CL4 | Total | χ2 | p | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Respondents/Percentage of Respondents | 82/41% | 4/2% | 66/33% | 48/24% | 200 | ||
Sex | 6.19 | t | |||||
Man | 41.8 | 0.0 | 49.2 | 59.1 | 47.6 | ||
Woman | 58.2 | 100.0 | 50.8 | 40.9 | 52.4 | ||
Level of schooling | 50.87 | *** | |||||
None | 0.0 | 33.0 | 1.6 | 0.0 | 1.1 | ||
Primary | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 2.3 | 0.5 | ||
Secondary | 1.3 | 33.3 | 3.3 | 4.5 | 3.2 | ||
High School | 19.0 | 0.0 | 21.3 | 20.5 | 19.8 | ||
Vocational training | 19.0 | 0.0 | 26.2 | 34.1 | 24.6 | ||
University students | 60.8 | 33.3 | 47.5 | 38.6 | 50.8 | ||
Is vegetarian | 0.0 | 33.3 | 1.6 | 0.0 | 1.1 | 31.03 | *** |
Income per capita | 17.14 | ns | |||||
<600 €/month | 15.6 | 33.3 | 5.4 | 12.2 | 11.9 | ||
600—1000 €/month | 9.1 | 33.3 | 12.5 | 22.0 | 13.6 | ||
1000—1500 €/month | 27.3 | 33.3 | 23.2 | 12.2 | 22.6 | ||
1500—2000 €/month | 24.7 | 0.0 | 23.2 | 31.7 | 25.4 | ||
>2000 €/month | 23.4 | 0.0 | 35.7 | 22.6 | 26.6 | ||
Religious food restrictions | 2.5 | 33.3 | 1.6 | 2.3 | 2.7 | 11.12 | * |
CL1 | CL2 | CL3 | CL4 | Total | χ2 | p | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Respondents/Percentage of Respondents | 82/41% | 4/2% | 66/33% | 48/24% | 200 | ||
Are you Vegetarian? 1 | 0.0 | 33.3 | 1.6 | 0.0 | 1.1 | 8.11 | * |
Do you have any food restrictions for your religion? 1 | 2.5 | 33.3 | 1.6 | 2.3 | 2.7 | 3.86 | ns |
Would you like to lose weight? 1 | 67.1 | 66.7 | 76.7 | 65.9 | 69.8 | 2.00 | ns |
Is your cholesterol level high? 1 | 21.5 | 66.7 | 26.2 | 22.7 | 24.1 | 2.91 | ns |
Do you live in a city? 1 | 81.0 | 100.0 | 82.0 | 77.3 | 79.4 | 1.67 | ns |
Have you heard of the Ojinegra de Teruel breed? | 41.8 | 66.7 | 21.7 | 31.8 | 34.2 | 7.83 | t |
Have you heard of lamb confit? 1 | 27.8 | 33.3 | 24.6 | 31.8 | 29.1 | 0.71 | ns |
Have you ever eaten lamb confit? 1,2 | 54.5 | 100.0 | 46.7 | 71.4 | 16.6 | 3.06 | ns |
Where did you eat it? 3 | |||||||
I cooked it myself | 30.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 16.0 | 10.14 | ns |
In a restaurant | 66.7 | 100.0 | 85.7 | 90.0 | 72.7 | ||
I bought it made | 0.0 | 0.0 | 14.3 | 10.0 | 6.1 | ||
Other answers | 13.3 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 15.2 |
CL1 | CL2 | CL3 | CL4 | Total | χ2 | p | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Respondents/Percentage of Respondents | 82/41% | 4/2% | 66/33% | 48/24% | 200 | ||
I like to cook | 118.81 | ns | |||||
Strongly disagree | 0.0 | 66.7 | 14.8 | 2.3 | 6.4 | ||
Disagree | 1.3 | 33.3 | 47.5 | 0.0 | 16.6 | ||
Agree | 49.4 | 0.0 | 37.7 | 61.4 | 47.6 | ||
Strongly agree | 49.4 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 36.4 | 29.4 | ||
I like foreign food | 43.95 | *** | |||||
Strongly disagree | 0.0 | 33.3 | 6.6 | 6.8 | 4.0 | ||
Disagree | 5.1 | 66.7 | 37.7 | 31.8 | 23.0 | ||
Agree | 65.8 | 0.0 | 42.6 | 50.0 | 53.5 | ||
Strongly agree | 29.1 | 0.0 | 13.1 | 11.4 | 19.3 | ||
At home, we prefer informal dinners | 49.45 | *** | |||||
Strongly disagree | 8.9 | 100.0 | 1.6 | 9.1 | 8.0 | ||
Disagree | 20.3 | 0.0 | 13.1 | 36.4 | 21.4 | ||
Agree | 54.4 | 0.0 | 62.3 | 47.7 | 54.5 | ||
Strongly agree | 1.0 | 0.0 | 23.0 | 6.8 | 16.0 | ||
I like going to restaurants with friends and family | 132.77 | *** | |||||
Strongly disagree | 0.0 | 66.7 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.1 | ||
Disagree | 3.8 | 33.3 | 4.9 | 6.8 | 5.3 | ||
Agree | 48.1 | 0.0 | 57.4 | 43.2 | 49.2 | ||
Strongly agree | 48.1 | 0.0 | 37.7 | 50.0 | 44.4 | ||
At home, everyone cooks | 48.36 | *** | |||||
Strongly disagree | 8.9 | 33.3 | 32.8 | 6.8 | 16.6 | ||
Disagree | 20.3 | 66.7 | 42.6 | 43.2 | 33.7 | ||
Agree | 43.0 | 0.0 | 19.7 | 45.5 | 35.3 | ||
Strongly agree | 27.8 | 0.0 | 4.9 | 4.5 | 14.4 | ||
I spend a lot of time cooking | 72.17 | *** | |||||
Strongly disagree | 2.5 | 0.0 | 29.5 | 1.7 | 11.8 | ||
Disagree | 20.3 | 0.0 | 59.0 | 38.6 | 36.9 | ||
Agree | 55.7 | 66.7 | 8.2 | 47.7 | 38.5 | ||
Strongly agree | 21.5 | 33.3 | 3.3 | 9.1 | 12.8 | ||
I like to eat | 143.40 | *** | |||||
Strongly disagree | 1.3 | 100.0 | 0.0 | 2.3 | 2.7 | ||
Disagree | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.6 | 0.0 | 0.5 | ||
Agree | 26.6 | 0.0 | 72.1 | 47.7 | 46.0 | ||
Strongly agree | 72.2 | 0.0 | 26.2 | 50.0 | 50.8 | ||
I like changes in food | 73.34 | *** | |||||
Strongly disagree | 0.0 | 0.0 | 6.6 | 11.4 | 4.8 | ||
Disagree | 3.8 | 0.0 | 19.7 | 54.5 | 20.9 | ||
Agree | 43.0 | 33.3 | 54.1 | 31.8 | 43.9 | ||
Strongly agree | 53.2 | 66.7 | 19.7 | 2.3 | 30.5 | ||
Planning meals is important for family nutrition | 62.06 | *** | |||||
Strongly disagree | 2.5 | 66.7 | 1.6 | 0.0 | 2.7 | ||
Disagree | 1.3 | 33.3 | 3.3 | 2.3 | 2.7 | ||
Agree | 39.2 | 0.0 | 39.3 | 34.1 | 37.4 | ||
Strongly agree | 57.0 | 0.0 | 55.7 | 63.6 | 57.2 | ||
Traditional recipes are best | 77.19 | *** | |||||
Strongly disagree | 6.3 | 66.7 | 9.8 | 0.0 | 7.0 | ||
Disagree | 51.9 | 33.3 | 54.1 | 11.4 | 42.8 | ||
Agree | 41.8 | 0.0 | 27.9 | 47.7 | 38.0 | ||
Strongly agree | 0.0 | 0.0 | 8.2 | 40.9 | 12.3 |
CL1 | CL2 | CL3 | CL4 | Total | χ2 | p | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Respondents/Percentage of Respondents | 82/41% | 4/2% | 66/33% | 48/24% | 200 | ||
Lamb meat with a mark of quality is better | 15.88 | t | |||||
Strongly disagree | 3.8 | 33.3 | 5.0 | 2.3 | 4.3 | ||
Disagree | 25.3 | 0.0 | 11.7 | 11.6 | 17.3 | ||
Agree | 54.4 | 66.7 | 70.0 | 60.5 | 61.1 | ||
Strongly agree | 16.5 | 0.0 | 13.3 | 25.6 | 17.3 | ||
Lamb is easy to cook | 48.19 | * | |||||
Strongly disagree | 1.3 | 100 | 8.3 | 2.3 | 4.9 | ||
Disagree | 29.1 | 0 | 28.3 | 20.5 | 26.5 | ||
Agree | 55.7 | 0 | 50 | 50 | 51.9 | ||
Strongly agree | 13.9 | 0 | 13.3 | 27.3 | 16.8 | ||
The best lamb is grass-fed | 10.58 | ns | |||||
Strongly disagree | 7.6 | 33.3 | 5.0 | 2.3 | 5.9 | ||
Disagree | 20.3 | 66.7 | 23.3 | 27.3 | 23.7 | ||
Agree | 48.1 | 0.0 | 48.3 | 50.0 | 47.8 | ||
Strongly agree | 24.1 | 0.0 | 23.3 | 20.5 | 22.6 | ||
The Ojinegra de Teruel breed is better than others | 13.85 | ns | |||||
Strongly disagree | 8.9 | 33.3 | 10.9 | 9.8 | 10.1 | ||
Disagree | 65.8 | 33.3 | 56.4 | 46.3 | 57.9 | ||
Agree | 22.8 | 0.0 | 29.1 | 34.1 | 27.0 | ||
Strongly agree | 2.5 | 33.3 | 3.6 | 9.8 | 5.1 | ||
The price of lamb is very important | 25.20 | ** | |||||
Strongly disagree | 1.3 | 33.3 | 1.6 | 2.3 | 2.2 | ||
Disagree | 17.7 | 33.3 | 24.6 | 7.0 | 17.7 | ||
Agree | 55.7 | 0.0 | 54.1 | 76.7 | 59.1 | ||
Strongly agree | 25.3 | 33.3 | 19.7 | 14.0 | 21.0 | ||
The lamb from Aragon is better than others | 14.550 | ns | |||||
Strongly disagree | 2.5 | 0.0 | 5.3 | 4.7 | 3.9 | ||
Disagree | 51.9 | 0.0 | 47.4 | 27.9 | 44.2 | ||
Agree | 25.3 | 50.0 | 36.8 | 37.2 | 32.0 | ||
Strongly agree | 20.3 | 50.0 | 10.5 | 30.2 | 19.9 | ||
Organic lamb is better than others | |||||||
Strongly disagree | 11.4 | 33.3 | 16.7 | 4.5 | 11.8 | 7.72 | ns |
Disagree | 30.4 | 33.3 | 23.3 | 40.9 | 30.6 | ||
Agree | 43.0 | 33.3 | 46.7 | 40.9 | 43.5 | ||
Strongly agree | 15.2 | 0.0 | 13.3 | 13.6 | 14.0 | ||
The best lamb is fed cereals | 9.52 | ns | |||||
Strongly disagree | 11.4 | 33.3 | 6.8 | 11.6 | 10.3 | ||
Disagree | 60.8 | 0.0 | 67.8 | 51.2 | 59.8 | ||
Agree | 25.3 | 66.7 | 20.3 | 32.6 | 26.1 | ||
Strongly agree | 2.5 | 0.0 | 5.1 | 4.7 | 3.8 |
CL1 | CL2 | CL3 | CL4 | Total | χ2 | p | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Respondents/Percentage of Respondents | 82/41% | 4/2% | 66/33% | 48/24% | 200 | ||
Appearance of freshness | 64.06 | *** | |||||
Nothing | 0.0 | 33.3 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | ||
Little bit | 2.5 | 0.0 | 6.6 | 4.5 | 4.3 | ||
Quite | 29.1 | 33.3 | 34.4 | 29.5 | 31.0 | ||
A lot | 68.4 | 33.3 | 59.0 | 65.9 | 64.2 | ||
Lamb category | 10.11 | ns | |||||
Nothing | 13.9 | 33.3 | 8.3 | 6.8 | 10.8 | ||
Little bit | 29.1 | 0.0 | 30.0 | 38.6 | 31.2 | ||
Quite | 34.2 | 66.7 | 46.7 | 29.5 | 37.6 | ||
A lot | 22.8 | 0.0 | 15.0 | 25.0 | 20.4 | ||
Light lamb category | 6.99 | ns | |||||
Nothing | 8.9 | 33.3 | 5.0 | 4.5 | 7.0 | ||
Little bit | 27.8 | 0.0 | 28.3 | 20.5 | 25.8 | ||
Quite | 41.8 | 33.3 | 48.3 | 50.0 | 45.7 | ||
A lot | 21.5 | 33.3 | 18.3 | 25.0 | 21.5 | ||
Light colored meat | 14.03 | ns | |||||
Nothing | 6.3 | 33.3 | 1.7 | 7.0 | 5.4 | ||
Little bit | 44.3 | 0.0 | 50.0 | 37.2 | 43.8 | ||
Quite | 38.0 | 33.3 | 41.7 | 34.9 | 38.4 | ||
A lot | 11.4 | 33.3 | 6.7 | 20.9 | 12.4 | ||
Age | 14.48 | ns | |||||
Nothing | 3.8 | 33.3 | 0.0 | 2.3 | 2.7 | ||
Little bit | 11.4 | 0.0 | 13.1 | 15.9 | 12.8 | ||
Quite | 48.1 | 33.3 | 47.5 | 38.6 | 45.5 | ||
A lot | 36.7 | 33.3 | 39.3 | 43.2 | 39.0 | ||
Breed | |||||||
Nothing | 11.4 | 33.3 | 1.6 | 6.8 | 7.5 | 18.82 | * |
Little bit | 62.0 | 0.0 | 52.5 | 45.5 | 54.0 | ||
Quite | 16.5 | 33.3 | 36.1 | 38.6 | 28.3 | ||
A lot | 10.1 | 33.3 | 9.8 | 9.1 | 10.2 | ||
Low fat | 11.78 | ns | |||||
Nothing | 5.1 | 33.3 | 1.7 | 2.3 | 3.8 | ||
Little bit | 22.8 | 0.0 | 31.7 | 25.0 | 25.8 | ||
Quite | 51.9 | 33.3 | 45.0 | 56.8 | 50.5 | ||
A lot | 20.3 | 33.3 | 21.7 | 15.9 | 19.9 |
© 2018 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Ripoll, G.; Joy, M.; Panea, B. Consumer Perception of the Quality of Lamb and Lamb Confit. Foods 2018, 7, 80. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods7050080
Ripoll G, Joy M, Panea B. Consumer Perception of the Quality of Lamb and Lamb Confit. Foods. 2018; 7(5):80. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods7050080
Chicago/Turabian StyleRipoll, Guillermo, Margalida Joy, and Begoña Panea. 2018. "Consumer Perception of the Quality of Lamb and Lamb Confit" Foods 7, no. 5: 80. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods7050080
APA StyleRipoll, G., Joy, M., & Panea, B. (2018). Consumer Perception of the Quality of Lamb and Lamb Confit. Foods, 7(5), 80. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods7050080