The Effect of Korean Native Chicken Breed Information on Consumer Sensory Evaluation and Purchase Behavior

Seoyoung Park1, Nayeong Kim1, Wooksung Kim1, Junghoon Moon2,*
Author Information & Copyright
1Department of Agricultural Economics & Rural Development, Seoul National University, Seoul 08826, Korea
2Research Institute of Agriculture and Life Sciences, Seoul National University, Seoul 08826, Korea
*Corresponding author : Junghoon Moon, Research Institute of Agriculture and Life Sciences, Seoul National University, Seoul 08826, Korea, Tel: +82-2-880-4722, Fax: +82-2-873-5080, E-mail:

© Korean Society for Food Science of Animal Resources. This is an Open-Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License ( which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Received: Sep 11, 2021 ; Revised: Nov 15, 2021 ; Accepted: Nov 25, 2021

Published Online: Jan 01, 2022


This study examined how chicken breed affects consumer behavior. The breeds evaluated were a Korean native chicken (KNC) and a commercial broiler (CB). Consumer behavior was measured by evaluating sensory attributes (taste, odor, and texture) and purchase behaviors [satisfaction, purchase intention, and willingness to pay (WTP)]. The sensory evaluation was conducted using healthy Korean consumers (n=100). The chicken was cooked in baeksuk (Korean traditional chicken soup), which is a seasonal summer health food in Korea. The participants evaluated sensory attributes and purchase behaviors between blinded samples of baeksuk (CB) and unblinded samples of baeksuk (KNC). The sensory evaluation involved chicken breasts and legs. The participants considered KNC as having a more umami taste, a chewier and juicer texture, and a less metallic odor than CB. Moreover, when participants were given KNC breed information, they expressed higher satisfaction, purchase intention, and WTP. The results of this study contribute to consumer behavior literature by revealing the effects of breed information on consumer sensory perceptions and purchase behaviors. Furthermore, the findings provide evidence that branding KNC is one way to increase its demand and low market share while contributing to sustainable consumption.

Keywords: Korean native chicken; consumer behavior; sensory evaluation; information effect; sustainable consumption


Poultry is the world’s most consumed livestock per capita. In 2022, global poultry consumption is anticipated to be 14.85 kg per capita (OECD-FAO, 2021). In addition, the global consumption of poultry meat is expected to account for 41% of all protein consumed from meat sources in 2030 (OECD-FAO, 2021). In line with this global trend, chicken consumption has increased in Korea (Park et al., 2020). According to the Korean Rural Development Administration, chicken consumption per capita reached 15.76 kg in 2020 (Rural Development Administration, 2021).

Korean native chickens (KNC), however, have experienced different demand patterns than overall chicken consumption. KNC has shown a slower growth rate than commercial broiler (CB), resulting in higher market price for KNC (Cha et al., 2014; Jin et al., 2017). CB is the most commonly bred chicken on Korean farms (Cha et al., 2014). On the other hand, the market share of KNC was only 2.8% in June 2021 (Korea Animal and Plant Quarantine Agency, 2021) and showed low consumer interest (Cha et al., 2014). Despite the increasing trend in chicken consumption, few consumers are interested in comparing chicken varieties, which is an additional reason for the decline in the market share of KNC (Nam, 2019).

In addition to improving market share, consumption of local chicken breeds, such as KNC, is critical to Korea’s sustainable development. KNC contributes to the diversification of chicken varieties (Cha et al., 2014; Jin et al., 2017), and breed diversity increases adaptability to environmental change and resilience to disease, enhances economic usefulness (Jin et al., 2017; Seo and Lee, 2016), and plays an essential role in social and food security issues (Altieri, 1999). Breed variety is related to sustainable development in the environmental, economic, and social sectors (Hoffmann, 2011). Despite the importance of maintaining genetic biodiversity, unification of species phenomena persist in global companies (Kang et al., 2011). Thus, consumption of KNC could be helpful to conserve the diversity of species in Korea’s homogenous chicken breed environment.

KNC has different characteristics than CB, having less fat and more protein than CB. Moreover, KNC has a higher content of inosine 5’-monophosphate (IMP), which is a nucleotide in the muscle that imparts flavor to the meat (Ahn and Park, 2002; Choe et al., 2010). Several prior studies have discussed the physicochemical traits of and sensory experiments with KNC and CB chicken meat to improve KNC breed characteristics (Cha et al., 2017; Jung et al., 2013; Lee et al., 2018). Even though consumer sensory expectations of chicken could differ due to inherent meat properties, there is a lack of research on consumer perceptions.

According to a study by Nam (2017), consumers have differing opinions of KNC. Five hundred consumers were surveyed about their perceptions of KNC. The results were ironic in that consumers simultaneously preferred the chewiness and disliked the toughness of KNC. Not only consumer opinions, but also sensory evaluations can be helpful to understand consumer preferences. Sensory evaluations can be influenced by experiences and presented information (Deliza and MacFie, 1996). Thus, consumer behaviors regarding KNC are needed to expand the limited KNC academic knowledge base.

According to the food-related behaviors schematic model (Cardello, 1994), sensory attributes such as taste, smell, texture, appearance, and temperature affect food acceptance and purchase behaviors. Additional information can also affect consumer perception, such as its production method, country of origin, composition, or nutritional quality (Cerjak et al., 2011; Deliza and MacFie, 1996). Prior studies have conducted similar sensory experiments on the relationship between food information and purchase behaviors. According to Choi and Moon (2021), consumer sensory evaluations of identical citrus wines showed different results depending on the information provided regarding their origins and product processing sites. Hwang et al. (2021) performed consumer sensory evaluations of the same salami but with varying information about antibiotics, grazing, and animal welfare. When information was given to consumers, they rated sensory attributes differently and showed higher purchase intention and willingness to pay (WTP). Previous studies have identified that product information cues affect consumer sensory evaluation and purchase behaviors. Despite the information effect on consumer choices, few studies have focused on the effects of breed information on consumer sensory evaluations and purchasing behaviors for chicken.

As mentioned above, prior studies have not evaluated consumer behavior on KNC. Therefore, this study aimed to determine the effect of KNC breed information cues on consumer sensory evaluations and purchase behaviors. We intended to derive marketing strategies that could improve the low market share of KNC and increase its sustainability.

Materials and Methods


A total of 100 healthy adult consumers was recruited using an online platform and was paid for participation. The participant recruitment information was posted, including clear guidelines of the requirements. In particular, eligible participants should not be experts in the food industry and should not have chicken allergies. The purpose and procedures of the study were explained clearly. In this study, general untrained consumers participated in the sensory analysis. Training was prohibited because the purpose was sensory analysis and not correct classification of a specific taste. The aim was to investigate the difference in taste perceived by general consumers according to chicken breed cue. When using untrained consumers in a sensory analysis, more than 100 samples are required (Nestrud and Lawless, 2011; Oliver et al., 2018; Perrin et al., 2008; Risvik et al., 1994). Therefore, this study recruited 100 untrained, general consumers to conduct sensory analysis. All participants provided informed consent before the start of the experiments, which were approved by the Seoul National University Institutional Review Board (IRB No. 2108/003-003).


This study used a typical Korean chicken dish, baeksuk, to analyze consumer perceptions of the sensory attributes of KNC. Samgyetang is a traditional Korean food in which glutinous rice, garlic, jujube, and ginseng are placed in a chicken stomach and boiled (Yoo et al., 1998). Baeksuk (Korean boiled chicken soup) is a seasonal summer health food made by boiling unseasoned chicken in water (Jang and Lee, 1988). Baeksuk is a common experimental material in chicken sensory testing (Han et al., 1996; Han, 2018; Jang and Lee, 1988; Jayasena et al., 2013; Jung et al., 2019; Kim et al., 2012). In summary, this study conducted sensory evaluations and consumer behavior surveys using KNC cooked in baeksuk.

Frozen KNC meats were used for the experiments. The chickens weighed approximately 600 grams each after slaughter. The chickens were halved manually using poultry scissors and boiled in premade stock to ensure the consistency of the flavor. A total of 100 mL of concentrated liquid chicken stock was diluted in 10 L of water. Then, the following flavors were infused into the base stock: 500 g of white radish, 100 g of garlic, 50 g of ginger, and 200 g of chopped onion. Additionally, 70 g of sea salt was added. The stock was refreshed every three experimental sessions. The 20 halved chicken pieces were boiled in the premade stock for 20 min; 10 of these pieces were removed for the second sensory evaluation. The remaining boiled chicken halves were served on rice with broth.

Experimental procedure and design

The consumers participated in two experimental conditions (KNC and CB cues) and evaluated sensory attributes immediately after tasting. The CB is the most commonly consumed chicken in Korean (Lee et al., 2012) and so was compared with the KNC. The samples were labeled with random three-digit numbers in a monadic sequence to avoid first-order carryover effects (Macfie et al., 1989). The KNC experimental condition provided KNC breed information with a KNC meat sample (unblinded condition). The CB experimental condition provided CB breed information with a KNC meat sample (blinded condition). The carryover effects are sensory biases due to residual sensations from previously tested (tasted) samples (Ferris et al., 2003; Lawless and Heymann, 2010; Meilgaard et al., 1999). Therefore, a sample of unrelated chicken breast was provided to the participants between the KNC and CB experimental conditions to control the carryover effects. The participants were seated behind dividers to obscure the responses of the other participants.

The experiment was conducted using a within-subject design, and the participants were randomly assigned to minimize the ordering effect. Forty-eight participants were assigned to the KNC condition first, while 52 were assigned to the CB condition first. Participants were asked to taste each sample and evaluate the same sensory attributes of each. Each participant received water and a piece of bread to clean the palate between evaluations. The duration of the experiment was 7 min. Table 1 and Fig. 1 show a summary of the experimental design.

Table 1. Summary of the experimental design
Number Material First information Second information Number of participants
664 KNC CB KNC 52
953 KNC KNC CB 48

KNC, Korean native chicken; CB, commercial broiler.

Download Excel Table
Fig. 1. Summary of the experimental procedure. KNC, Korean native chicken; CB, commercial broiler.
Download Original Figure

The sensory evaluation survey was conducted using sensory analysis and purchase behavior questionnaires (Tables 2 and 3). For sensory analysis, taste (sweet, salty, bitter, umami), odor (oily, intense, metallic), and texture (tender, juicy, chewy) were measured using a 7-point scale (1, very weak; 7, very strong). The sensory attributes were chosen based on past studies on chicken sensory analysis attributes. Purchase behavior, satisfaction, and purchase intention were measured using a 7-point scale (1, strongly disagree; 7, strongly agree). The purchase behavior items were modified to fit chicken meat sensory evaluations. To measure participant WTP, we reported whether they would purchase the chicken at the presented market price.

Table 2. Sensory attributes and definitions used in descriptive analysis
Attributes Definition Reference
Taste Salty The taste on the tongue associated with sodium ions1). (Liu et al., 2004)
Sweet The taste on the tongue associated with sugars1). (Sow and Grongnet, 2010)
Bitter The taste on the tongue associated with bitter agents such as caffeine1).
Umami The taste on the tongue associated with monosodium glutamate (MSG)2). (Escobedo del Bosque et al., 2020)
Odor Oily The intensity of the fatty odor of the meat. (Sow and Grongnet, 2010)
Intense The intensity of the chicken odor.
Metallic The intensity of the smell of metal/blood. (Kruk et al., 2011)
Texture Tender The intensity of the tenderness of the meat after the first bite. (Sow and Grongnet, 2010)
Juicy The intensity of the juiciness of the meat in the mouth.
Chewy The intensity of the meat’s chewiness.

1) Adapted from Johnson and Civille (1986).

2) Adapted from Leong et al. (2016).

Download Excel Table
Table 3. Purchase behavior questionnaire
Constructs Items Reference
Satisfaction In general, I am satisfied with this product. (Juhl et al., 2002)
The product I ate fulfilled my expectations.
When I imagine perfect chicken meat in baeksuk, this product is close.
Purchase intention I am highly likely to purchase this product. (Dodds et al., 1991)
In the near future, I would consider purchasing this product.
I am very willing to buy this product.
Download Excel Table
Statistical analysis

The statistical analysis was conducted using principal component analysis (PCA) and a multiple linear regression model. The PCA was performed in four groups (KNC breast, KNC leg, CB breast, and CB leg) to investigate the differences of sensory attributes according to chicken breed cues (KNC and CB) and part of chicken (breast and leg). The PCA was performed using the sensometrics software program SENSOTOOL (Sensometrics, Seoul, Korea). This study conducted multiple linear regression analyses to investigate the statistical difference between sensory attributes and purchase behavior based on chicken breed cues. A multiple linear regression model was performed using the open-source R software program (R Core Team, Vienna, Austria).

Results and Discussion

General characteristics of the participants

A descriptive analysis of the participants is shown in Table 4. The study sample consisted of 50 males and 50 females, with a total of 100 participants. Table 4 also indicates the participants’ hunger status and usual perceptions of chicken meat and baeksuk (1, not at all; 7: very much). Participants were generally not very hungry when participating in the experiments and typically liked chicken meat and baeksuk.

Table 4. Summary of descriptive analysis
N Min. Max. Mean SD
Gender 100 Male (0)=50, Female (1)=50
Age 100 20 58 29.88 8.26
I am hungry now. 100 1 7 3.73 1.34
I like chicken meat. 100 3 7 6.05 0.93
I like chicken breast meat. 100 1 7 4.74 1.73
I like chicken leg meat. 100 1 7 5.94 1.20
I like baeksuk. 100 2 7 5.35 1.30
Download Excel Table
Sensory evaluation

The sensory data were standardized and analyzed using PCA. The PCA results show that Dim1 and Dim2 significantly discriminated between KNC and CB (p<0.05), explaining 65.95% and 31.22% of the sensory data variation, respectively. Dim1 describes the dimensions of sweet, bitter, umami, oily odor, juicy, and chewy texture attributes. Dim2 describes the dimensions of intense, metallic odor, and salty taste attributes.

The PCA results also reveal representative sensory attributes of KNC breast, KNC leg, CB breast, and CB leg (Fig. 2). In other words, the PCA map shows that the sensory attributes are clearly distinguished by chicken breed cues (KNC and CB) and chicken part (breast and legs). The PCA map also explains how taste, odor, and texture were evaluated differently based on chicken breed cues and part of the chicken.

Fig. 2. Principal component analysis results of the sensory attributes. KNC, Korean native chicken; CB, commercial broiler.
Download Original Figure
Chicken breast

Chicken breast with a KNC cue was characterized by high levels of salty taste. Chicken breast with a CB cue was strongly associated with bitter taste attributes. The results show that the participants considered the chicken breast to taste saltier when they knew that the breed was KNC. In addition, the results indicate that participants evaluated the taste of chicken breast to be more bitter when they knew that it was CB.

Chicken leg

Chicken legs with a KNC cue were characterized by high expression of the sensory attributes of chewy, sweet, oily, juicy, tender, and umami. Chicken legs with a CB cue were characterized by high expression of the sensory attributes of metallic and intense. The results show that the participants considered the chicken leg chewier, sweeter, juicier, oilier, more tender, and with greater umami when they knew that the breed was KNC. Participants also evaluated chicken legs to be more metallic and intense when they were informed that the breed of chicken was CB.

Linear regression
Control variables

Demographic factors have a variable impact on sensory evaluation of meats (O’Reilly et al., 2020). Hunger status has a significant effect on sensory evaluation, especially flavor (Christensen, 1983). Consumer perception of meat affects the sensory evaluation. In general, people who enjoy red meat and consider it an important part of their lives tend to give it higher sensory scores (Thompson et al., 2005). The sensory scores of a participant assigned to a sample can be affected by the number of previous samples tasted, illustrating an ordering effect (Ball, 1997). In this regard, demographic factors (age and gender), hunger, perception of chicken meat, and material order were used as control variables to eliminate biases in extraneous variables other than the independent variables.

Chicken breast

The results show (Table 5) that, with KNC meat, the umami (β=0.145, p<0.05) and chewy texture (β=0.237, p<0.001) were significantly higher. The juicy texture and metallic odor were not significant but showed meaningful increasing and decreasing tendencies when the chicken breed was KNC compared to CB, respectively. In other words, the participants considered the chicken breast to have a higher umami taste and chewier texture when they knew that the breed of chicken was KNC. Moreover, the participants tended to think that the chicken breast had higher juiciness and lower metallic odor when they were informed that the breed was KNC. These results agree with a similar tendency in prior research of KNC. Even though participants tasted the same chicken materials, they assigned different attribute scores depending on breed cue information. According to Jayasena et al. (2014) and Lee et al. (2018), KNC breasts and legs have more umami-related compounds such as arachidonic acid than do CBs. KNC breast and leg texture had higher chewiness and juiciness in prior sensory evaluations (Cha et al., 2014; Kim et al., 2018), which included a descriptive sensory analysis with trained assessors. KNC breast has more flavorful volatile compounds than CB (Lee et al., 2012). Therefore, the negative metallic odor could be lower in KNC. In this respect, this study supports the results of previous studies that KNC is more umami, chewier, juicier, and less metallic than CB. In addition, the scope of the study was expanded by interpreting these results from the perspective of providing information on chicken breed.

Table 5. Results of linear regression in chicken breast attributes
Sensory attributes of chicken breast
Salty Sweet Bitter Umami Oily Intense Metallic Tender Juicy Chewy
(Intercept) β 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
SE 0.905 0.986 0.772 0.823 1.135 1.118 1.088 1.095 1.099 0.958
p-value 0.003 0.474 0.232 0.001 0.012 0.010 0.043 0.211 0.248 0.026
Category (KNC=1, CB=0) β 0.095 0.068 –0.015 0.145 0.097 –0.067 –0.126 0.058 0.127 0.237
SE 0.173 0.188 0.147 0.157 0.216 0.213 0.208 0.209 0.210 0.183
p-value 0.176 0.307 0.828 0.038* 0.164 0.335 0.062 0.413 0.071 0.000***
Material order (first=1, second=2) β 0.053 0.061 0.140 0.016 –0.010 0.048 0.008 0.072 0.071 –0.057
SE 0.173 0.188 0.147 0.157 0.216 0.213 0.208 0.209 0.210 0.183
p-value 0.451 0.362 0.042* 0.815 0.887 0.487 0.902 0.310 0.308 0.385
Gender (female=1, male=0) β 0.086 0.191 0.073 0.069 0.088 0.168 0.214 0.007 0.007 0.223
SE 0.185 0.201 0.158 0.168 0.231 0.227 0.222 0.223 0.224 0.196
p-value 0.247 0.008** 0.320 0.352 0.239 0.024* 0.003** 0.928 0.930 0.002**
Age β 0.052 0.210 0.061 –0.001 –0.069 –0.176 –0.097 –0.045 –0.005 –0.016
SE 0.011 0.012 0.009 0.010 0.014 0.014 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.012
p-value 0.483 0.003** 0.399 0.986 0.346 0.017* 0.170 0.549 0.942 0.820
Hunger β 0.193 0.027 0.227 0.086 0.123 0.169 0.239 –0.018 –0.026 0.013
SE 0.067 0.073 0.057 0.061 0.084 0.082 0.080 0.081 0.081 0.071
p-value 0.008** 0.693 0.002** 0.232 0.087 0.019* 0.001*** 0.800 0.718 0.853
Prefer chicken meat β –0.045 –0.039 –0.070 0.140 –0.013 0.008 –0.031 0.131 0.140 0.263
SE 0.114 0.124 0.097 0.104 0.142 0.140 0.137 0.138 0.138 0.120
p-value 0.597 0.626 0.399 0.099 0.877 0.927 0.699 0.128 0.099 0.001**
Prefer chicken breast met β –0.026 0.208 0.184 –0.123 –0.136 0.059 0.153 –0.011 –0.046 –0.141
SE 0.059 0.064 0.050 0.054 0.074 0.073 0.071 0.072 0.072 0.063
p-value 0.753 0.008** 0.023* 0.135 0.096 0.472 0.053 0.894 0.579 0.071
Prefer chicken leg meat β –0.068 0.154 –0.034 0.108 0.161 0.041 0.126 0.057 0.061 –0.011
SE 0.091 0.099 0.077 0.083 0.113 0.112 0.109 0.110 0.110 0.096
p-value 0.440 0.067 0.697 0.218 0.067 0.636 0.136 0.524 0.489 0.894
Prefer baeksuk β 0.181 0.133 –0.069 0.043 0.047 0.037 –0.169 0.111 0.123 0.146
SE 0.076 0.083 0.065 0.069 0.097 0.094 0.092 0.092 0.093 0.081
p-value 0.024* 0.081 0.379 0.584 0.554 0.644 0.028* 0.169 0.123 0.054
Sensory attribute model r2 0.081 0.164 0.115 0.084 0.093 0.096 0.151 0.061 0.079 0.180
Adjusted r2 0.037 0.125 0.073 0.040 0.050 0.053 0.111 0.016 0.035 0.141
p-value 0.061 0.000*** 0.005** 0.050 0.027* 0.022* 0.000*** 0.205 0.070 0.000***

* p<0.05,

** p<0.01,

*** p<0.001.

KNC, Korean native chicken; CB, commercial broiler.

Download Excel Table

The results also show that demographic factors, hunger, perception of chicken meat, and material order had a significant effect on the sensory evaluation of the chicken breast. Participants rated the umami taste as higher when they had a greater preference for chicken meat. Participants rated the texture as chewier when they (1) were female, (2) preferred chicken meat, (3) did not prefer chicken breast, and (4) preferred baeksuk. Therefore, demographic factors, hunger, perception of chicken meat, and material order were statistically controlled in the regression model for chicken breast attributes.

Chicken leg

The results show (Table 6) that, when the chicken breed was KNC, the salty taste (β=0.147, p<0.05), umami taste (β=0.166, p<0.01), juicy texture (β=0.163, p<0.05), and chewy texture (β=0.157, p<0.05) of the chicken leg were higher than when the chicken breed was CB. Therefore, the participants considered the chicken leg to be saltier and to have greater umami taste, juiciness, and a chewier texture when they knew that the breed was KNC.

Table 6. Results of linear regression in chicken leg attributes
Sensory attributes of chicken leg
Salty (%) Sweet Bitter Umami Oily Intense Metallic Tender Juicy Chewy
(Intercept) β 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
SE 0.894 1.051 0.771 0.826 1.052 1.093 1.177 0.901 0.840 0.783
p-value 0.001 0.586 0.047 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
Category (KNC=1, CB=0) β 0.147 0.083 –0.038 0.166 0.081 –0.071 –0.038 0.063 0.163 0.157
SE 0.171 0.201 0.147 0.158 0.201 0.209 0.225 0.172 0.161 0.150
p-value 0.034* 0.226 0.579 0.009** 0.228 0.294 0.574 0.360 0.013* 0.019*
Material order (first=1, second=2) β 0.054 0.113 0.137 –0.043 –0.049 0.077 –0.026 0.096 0.054 –0.037
SE 0.171 0.201 0.147 0.158 0.201 0.209 0.225 0.172 0.161 0.150
p-value 0.433 0.100 0.048* 0.500 0.467 0.254 0.706 0.163 0.406 0.575
Gender (female=1, male=0) β 0.112 0.191 0.001 0.135 0.062 0.001 0.096 0.083 0.250 0.287
SE 0.183 0.215 0.157 0.169 0.214 0.223 0.240 0.184 0.171 0.160
p-value 0.128 0.010** 0.987 0.047* 0.387 0.991 0.187 0.258 0.000*** 0.000***
Age β –0.078 0.071 –0.040 –0.067 –0.205 –0.318 –0.254 –0.091 –0.149 –0.052
SE 0.011 0.013 0.009 0.010 0.013 0.013 0.014 0.011 0.010 0.010
p-value 0.280 0.330 0.586 0.320 0.004** 0.000*** 0.000*** 0.212 0.030* 0.459
Hunger β 0.171 –0.030 0.167 0.039 0.103 0.123 0.114 –0.019 –0.008 0.017
SE 0.066 0.078 0.057 0.061 0.077 0.081 0.087 0.066 0.062 0.058
p-value 0.016* 0.676 0.020* 0.555 0.140 0.077 0.105 0.785 0.902 0.803
Prefer chicken meat β –0.061 –0.044 –0.025 0.015 –0.015 –0.031 0.051 –0.054 0.017 0.166
SE 0.113 0.132 0.097 0.104 0.132 0.137 0.148 0.113 0.106 0.099
p-value 0.461 0.595 0.766 0.849 0.851 0.705 0.539 0.516 0.828 0.041*
Prefer chicken breast meat β –0.104 0.183 0.123 –0.248 –0.233 0.087 0.086 –0.074 –0.068 –0.025
SE 0.058 0.069 0.050 0.054 0.069 0.071 0.077 0.059 0.055 0.051
p-value 0.199 0.024* 0.132 0.001** 0.004** 0.273 0.280 0.361 0.372 0.751
Prefer chicken leg meat β –0.027 0.131 –0.173 0.256 0.027 –0.112 –0.152 0.106 0.163 0.149
SE 0.090 0.105 0.077 0.083 0.106 0.110 0.118 0.090 0.084 0.079
p-value 0.752 0.131 0.047* 0.002** 0.753 0.188 0.077 0.222 0.047* 0.078
Prefer baeksuk β 0.219 0.104 0.073 0.178 0.125 0.115 –0.052 0.246 0.271 0.103
SE 0.075 0.089 0.065 0.070 0.088 0.092 0.099 0.076 0.071 0.066
p-value 0.006** 0.185 0.355 0.015* 0.105 0.136 0.501 0.002** 0.000*** 0.178
Sensory attribute model r2 0.113 0.113 0.098 0.237 0.143 0.142 0.131 0.106 0.210 0.158
Adjusted r2 0.071 0.071 0.055 0.201 0.102 0.101 0.089 0.063 0.172 0.118
p-value 0.006** 0.006** 0.019* 0.000*** 0.000*** 0.001** 0.001** 0.011* 0.000*** 0.000***

* p<0.05,

** p<0.01,

*** p<0.001.

KNC, Korean native chicken; CB, commercial broiler.

Download Excel Table

The sensory attributes of the KNC leg showed similar results. Participants rated the KNC leg as more umami, chewier, and juicier, consistent with the results of previous studies (Cha et al., 2014; Jayasena et al., 2014; Kim et al., 2018; Lee et al., 2018). However, in the case of KNC legs, salty taste significantly increased when KNC breed information was given. These results should be interpreted considering the correlation between salty and umami tastes. Umami has been widely accepted as the fifth taste, alongside the other basic tastes of sweet, salty, bitter, and sour (Zhang et al., 2017). Umami means “good taste” or “delicious” in Japanese and is often used to describe a savory or meaty flavor (Han et al., 2018). Umami is less familiar than other tastes and is commonly confused with saltiness (Overberg et al., 2012). Since the peaks of the areas activated by umami and salty tastes are located in the mid-insula of the brain, they are closely related (Nakamura et al., 2011). In this regard, participants might concurrently rate chicken as saltier with more of an umami taste.

Participants indicated a higher salty taste when they (1) felt hungrier and (2) preferred baeksuk. Participants indicated a higher umami taste when they (1) were female, (2) did not prefer chicken breast, (3) preferred chicken leg, and (4) preferred baeksuk. Participants rated the texture as juicier when they (1) were female, (2) younger, (3) preferred chicken leg, and (4) preferred baeksuk. Participants indicated chewier texture when they (1) were female, (2) preferred chicken meat, and (3) preferred chicken leg. Thus, demographic factors, hunger, perception of chicken meat, and material order were statistically controlled in the regression model for chicken leg attributes.

Purchase behavior

The results show (Table 7) that the satisfaction (β=0.216, p<0.001), purchase intention (β=0.184, p<0.01), and WTP (β=0.230, p<0.001) of chicken baeksuk products were higher when the chicken breed was KNC than when it was CB. In other words, participants were more satisfied, had higher purchase intention, and were more willing to pay a higher price for chicken baeksuk products when the chicken breed was KNC than when it was CB.

Table 7. Results of linear regression in purchase behavior
Purchase behavior
Satisfaction Purchase intention Willingness to pay (WTP)
(Intercept) β 0.000 0.000 0.000
SE 0.931 1.047 2,010.359
p-value 0.029 0.492 0.000
Category (KNC=1, CB=0) β 0.216 0.184 0.230
SE 0.178 0.200 384.088
p-value 0.001*** 0.005** 0.001***
Material order (first=1, second=2) β 0.048 0.107 0.119
SE 0.178 0.200 384.088
p-value 0.456 0.103 0.078
Gender (female=1, male=0) β 0.085 0.063 0.227
SE 0.190 0.214 410.221
p-value 0.215 0.368 0.002**
Age β –0.054 0.014 –0.070
SE 0.011 0.013 24.665
p-value 0.429 0.838 0.325
Hunger β –0.142 –0.125 –0.112
SE 0.069 0.077 148.454
p-value 0.034* 0.065 0.108
Prefer chicken meat β 0.012 0.029 0.010
SE 0.117 0.132 252.858
p-value 0.876 0.713 0.906
Prefer chicken breast meat β –0.032 –0.048 0.101
SE 0.061 0.068 131.467
p-value 0.670 0.535 0.200
Prefer chicken leg meat β 0.353 0.288 0.158
SE 0.093 0.105 201.758
p-value 0.000*** 0.001*** 0.063
Prefer baeksuk β 0.069 0.138 –0.021
SE 0.079 0.088 169.624
p-value 0.350 0.065 0.780
Purchase behavior model r2 0.216 0.195 0.148
Adjusted r2 0.179 0.156 0.108
p-value 0.000*** 0.000*** 0.000***

* p<0.05,

** p<0.01,

*** p<0.001.

KNC, Korean native chicken; CB, commercial broiler.

Download Excel Table

The results show that the higher was the participants’ preference for chicken legs, the higher were their satisfaction, purchase intention, and WTP. It was also found that the higher was the participant’s hunger, the lower were their satisfaction and purchase intention. In addition, the WTP of chicken baeksuk products was higher in females and when participants tasted the second experimental sample. Therefore, demographic factors, hunger, perception of chicken meat, and material order were statistically controlled in the regression model for purchase behaviors.

These results imply that KNC breed information is a sensory cue that affects consumer perceptions and purchase behaviors, similar to Cardello’s (1994) food-related behavior model. These results are also consistent with previous studies that perceived sustainable information of food to affect purchase behaviors (de-Magistris and Gracia, 2016; Hwang et al., 2021; Seo and Lee, 2016). Consumption of KNC is related to sustainable development, which can be increased by promoting diverse chicken breeds (Cha et al., 2014; Hoffmann, 2011). Therefore, the results of this study contribute to the expansion of sustainable consumption by providing implications that KNC chicken breed information has a positive effect on purchase behavior.

Practical contributions

Demand for food products depends on consumer expectations based on quality cues and quality attributes (Steenkamp, 1990). Quality cues are sensed before product consumption, and quality attributes are sensed after/during product consumption (Torquati et al., 2018). Quality cues are divided into intrinsic (size, color, other physical characteristics; Ophuis and Van Trijp, 1995) and extrinsic cues (price, brand, breed origin; Luning et al., 2002; Zanoli et al., 2013). Quality attributes are classified into experience and credence attributes (Nelson, 1970; Wilde, 1980). According to the results, KNC value could be highly based on extrinsic cues and consumer experiences. Therefore, emphasizing the unique characteristics and breed information would be helpful to construct consumer perceptions of KNC. As mentioned above, demand for KNC was fulfilled without credence in this study. Branding could be a solution to build consumer credence. Since brands are identified as significant extrinsic signals (Deliza and MacFie, 1996), they are built on consumer trust and relationships (Fernqvist and Ekelund, 2014). Branding KNC could have practical implications.

Branding consists of developing and maintaining sets of product attributes and values that are coherent, appropriate, distinctive, protectable, and appealing to consumers (Murphy, 1992). Moreover, branding allows assignment of the responsibility for controlling and delivering quality characteristics of meat (Bernués et al., 2003). KNC brand would be helpful to stakeholders who are related to KNC, such as producers, retailers, marketers, and consumers. Farmers could be encouraged to raise KNC breeds, the retailer could be interested in adopting new brands, it could be easier for marketers to promote KNC brand in contrast to no brand, and consumers could aid the credence and reliability of KNC products. In the Korean beef and pork industries, corporations have established brands as Korean beef (Hanwoo) and Korean pork (Handon) (Hanwoo Association, 2021; Handon Association, 2021). Each brand actively promotes products on TV and in retail marketplaces. Hence, to improve the market share of KNC, associations should make efforts to promote a brand.

Academic contributions

This study conducted the first sensory evaluation of KNC breed information cue effects on general consumer sensory perceptions and purchase behaviors. This study utilized PCA to map the sensory attributes of KNC and CB, partly to understand how consumers react to sensory evaluations by breed information cues. Experiments were conducted with the same KNC materials and different cues, blinded samples of baeksuk (CB) and unblinded samples of baeksuk (KNC). In other words, even with the same KNC materials, the participant’s sensory evaluation and purchase behaviors differed according to the information provided on the chicken breed (KNC vs. CB). Even though the purpose of the study was not to correctly distinguish sensory characteristics, consumers well described the characteristics of KNC. In addition, the results showed a similar tendency to prior research on KNC. Previous studies have focused on improving KNC breed characteristics using trained sensory panel subjects (Cha et al., 2014; Kim et al., 2018; Lee et al., 2018; Park et al., 2010). Therefore, this study constructively conducted consumer research, which is limited in the KNC academic area.

Limitations and future studies

While the results of this study provide academic and practical insights for KNC researchers and marketers, there are also several limitations. First, the majority of recruited participants was in their 20s and 30s. Participants should be recruited evenly across age categories for future studies to obtain more reliable and generalizable results. Second, umami and salty tastes can be confused by ordinary consumers. Therefore, future studies should control the consumer experience of the umami taste. Third, for future research, collecting actual purchase patterns with perceptions could generate more insightful practical implications.


This study examined the effects of KNC breed information cues on consumer sensory perceptions and purchase behaviors. Consumers were served the same KNC materials with two different conditions. The blind condition was served with the CB breed cue, and the unblinded condition was the KNC breed cue. Although evaluating the same materials, consumers reported different perceptions under the absence and presence of breed information. Sensory attributes and purchase behaviors were influenced by information cues. When consumers received the KNC breed information cue, they perceived significantly different sensory characteristics of KNC and demonstrated higher purchase behaviors. Therefore, the findings of this study offer marketing insights that could increase the demand and market share of KNC.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no potential conflicts of interest.


This work was supported by Korea Institute of Planning and Evaluation for Technology in Food, Agriculture, and Forestry (IPET) through Golden Seed Project, funded by Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs (MAFRA) (213010-05-5-SB430) and “Cooperative Research Program for Agricuture Science & Technology Development (Project No. PJ012822032021)” Rural Development Administration, Korea.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization: Park S, Kim W, Moon J. Data curation: Park S, Kim N. Formal analysis: Park S, Kim N. Methodology: Park S, Kim W, Moon J. Software: Park S, Kim N. Validation: Park S. Investigation: Park S, Kim N, Moon J. Writing - original draft: Park S, Kim N, Moon J. Writing - review & editing: Park S, Kim N, Kim W, Moon J.

Ethics Approval

This research was approved by the Seoul National University Institutional Review Board (IRB No. 2108/003-003).



Ahn DH, Park SY. 2002; Studies on components related to taste such as free amino acids and nucleotides in Korean native chicken meat. J Korean Soc Food Sci Nutr. 31:547-552


Altieri MA. 1999; The ecological role of biodiversity in agroecosystems. Agric Ecosyst Environ. 74:19-31


Ball RD. 1997; Incomplete block designs for the minimisation of order and carry-over effects in sensory analysis. Food Qual Prefer. 8:111-118


Bernués A, Olaizola A, Corcoran K. 2003; Labelling information demanded by European consumers and relationships with purchasing motives, quality and safety of meat. Meat Sci. 65:1095-1106


Cardello AV. 1994; Consumer expectations and their role in food acceptance. In Measurement of food preferences. In: MacFie HJH, Thomson DMH, editors.(ed)Springer. Boston, MA, USA: pp p. 253-297


Cerjak M, Karolyi D, Kovačić D. 2011; Effect of information about pig breed on consumers’ acceptability of dry sausage. J Sens Stud. 26:128-134


Cha J, Park B, Park M, Kang H, Kim Y, Kim C, Heo K, Choo H, Kang B. 2017; Inbreeding levels and pedigree structure of Korean indigenous chicken population. Korean J Poult Sci. 44:83-92


Cha JS, Kim SH, Jung S, Kang HJ, Jo C, Nam KC. 2014; Comparison of meat quality and sensory characteristics of different native chickens in Korean market. Korean J Poult Sci. 41:53-59


Chakraborty SK, Kumbhar BK, Chakraborty S, Yadav P. 2011; Influence of processing parameters on textural characteristics and overall acceptability of millet enriched biscuits using response surface methodology. J Food Sci Technol. 48:167-174


Choe JH, Nam KC, Jung S, Kim BN, Yun HJ, Jo CR. 2010; Differences in the quality characteristics between commercial Korean native chickens and broilers. Korean J Food Sci Anim Resour. 30:13-19


Choi SH, Moon JH. 2021; Effects of regional information on consumers’ sensory evaluation and purchasing behavior of processed foods: For mandarin liquor. Foodserv Manage Soc Korea. 24:345-372


Christensen CM. 1983; Effects of color on aroma, flavor and texture judgments of foods. J Food Sci. 48:787-790


de-Magistris T, Gracia A. 2016; Consumers’ willingness-to-pay for sustainable food products: The case of organically and locally grown almonds in Spain. J Clean Prod. 118:97-104


Deliza R, MacFie HJ. 1996; The generation of sensory expectation by external cues and its effect on sensory perception and hedonic ratings: A review. J Sens Stud. 11:103-128


Dodds WB, Monroe KB, Grewal D. 1991; Effects of price, brand, and store information on buyers’ product evaluations. J Mark Res. 28:307-319


Escobedo Del Bosque CI, Altmann BA, Ciulu M, Halle I, Jansen S, Nolte T, Weigend S, Mörlein D. 2020; Meat quality parameters and sensory properties of one high-performing and two local chicken breeds fed with vicia faba. Foods. 9:1052


Fernqvist F, Ekelund L. 2014; Credence and the effect on consumer liking of food: A review. Food Qual Prefer. 32:340-353


Ferris SJ, Kempton RA, Muir DD. 2003; Carryover in sensory trials. Food Qual Prefer. 14:299-304


Han JS, Han KP, Kim JS, Kim MH. 1996; A study for the mechanical and sensory characteristics of chickens by cooking methods: For the focus on native chicken. J East Asian Soc Diet Life. 6:307-316.


Han K. 2018; Mechanical and sensory properties of chicken according to the cooking method. 2018 The East Asian Society of Dietary Life Conference. Seoul. Korea: p p. 171.


Han P, Mohebbi M, Unrath M, Hummel C, Hummel T. 2018; Different neural processing of umami and salty taste determined by umami identification ability independent of repeated umami exposure. Neuroscience. 383:74-83


Handon Association. Indroduce of Handon association. Available fromhttps://porkboard.han-don.comAccessed at Sep 28, 2021


Hanwoo Association. Introduce of Hanwoo association. Available fromhttp://www.ihanwoo.orgAccessed at Sep 28, 2021


Hoffmann I. 2011; Livestock biodiversity and sustainability. Livest Sci. 139:69-79


Hwang J, Lee S, Jo M, Cho W, Moon J. 2021; The effect of sustainability-related information on the sensory evaluation and purchase behavior towards salami products. Food Sci Anim Resour. 41:95-109


Jang YS, Lee H. 1988; Study on rheological characterization and chemical composition by cooking method of yeongebacksuk (Korean traditional cooked chicken). Korean J Food Cook Sci. 4:31-38.


Jayasena DD, Jung S, Kim HJ, Bae YS, Yong HI, Lee JH, Kim JG, Jo C. 2013; Comparison of quality traits of meat from Korean native chickens and broilers used in two different traditional Korean cuisines. Asian-Australas J Anim Sci. 26:1038-1046


Jayasena DD, Kim SH, Lee HJ, Jung S, Lee JH, Park HB, Jo C. 2014; Comparison of the amounts of taste-related compounds in raw and cooked meats from broilers and Korean native chickens. Poult Sci. 93:3163-3170


Jin S, Jayasena DD, Jo C, Lee JH. 2017; The breeding history and commercial development of the Korean native chicken. Worlds Poult Sci J. 73:163-174


Johnson PB, Civille GV. 1986; A standardized lexicon of meat WOF descriptors. J Sens Stud. 1:99-104


Juhl HJ, Kristensen K, Østergaard P. 2002; Customer satisfaction in European food retailing. J Retail Consum Serv. 9:327-334


Jung S, Bae YS, Kim HJ, Jayasena DD, Lee JH, Park HB, Heo KN, Jo C. 2013; Carnosine, anserine, creatine, and inosine 5′-monophosphate contents in breast and thigh meats from 5 lines of Korean native chicken. Poult Sci. 92:3275-3282


Jung S, Jo K, Lee S, Choi Y. 2019; Effect of ultrasound treatment on the quality properties of chicken breast meat and the broth from Korean chicken soup (baeksuk). Korean J Agric Sci. 46:539-548.


Kang BS, Hong EC, Kim HK, Kim CD, Heo KN, Choo HJ, Suh OS, Hwangbo J. 2011; Productivity and performance test of egg-type commercial Korean native chickens. Korean J Poult Sci. 38:331-338


Kim HC, Choe J, Nam KC, Jung S, Jo C. 2018; Productivity and meat quality of the new crossbred Korean native chickens compared with commercial breeds. Korean J Poult Sci. 45:125-135


Kim HJ, Yun HJ, Lee JH, Heo KN, Kang BS, Jo CU. 2012; Optimization of process condition of boiled Korean native chicken by response surface methodology. Korean J Agric Sci. 39:195-202


Korea Animal and Plant Quarantine Agency. Annual report of slaughter animals. Available from at Jul 19, 2021


Kruk ZA, Yun H, Rutley DL, Lee EJ, Kim YJ, Jo C. 2011; The effect of high pressure on microbial population, meat quality and sensory characteristics of chicken breast fillet. Food Control. 22:6-12


Lawless HT, Heymann H. 2010; Sensory evaluation of food: Principles and practices. 2nd edSpringer. New York, NY, USA: p p. 619


Lee KH, Kim HJ, Lee HJ, Kang MG, Jo CR. 2012; A study on components related to flavor and taste in commercial broiler and Korean native chicken meat. Korean J Food Preserv. 19:385-392


Lee SY, Park JY, Hyun JM, Jung S, Jo C, Nam KC. 2018; Comparative analysis of meat quality traits of new strains of native chickens for samgyetang. Korean J Poult Sci. 45:175-182


Leong J, Kasamatsu C, Ong E, Hoi JT, Loong MN. 2016; A study on sensory properties of sodium reduction and replacement in Asian food using difference‐from–control test. Food Sci Nutr. 4:469-478


Liu Y, Lyon BG, Windham WR, Lyon CE, Savage EM. 2004; Principal component analysis of physical, color, and sensory characteristics of chicken breasts deboned at two, four, six, and twenty-four hours postmortem. Poult Sci. 83:101-108


Luning PA, Marcelis WJ, Jongen WMF. 2002; Food quality management: A techno-managerial approach. Wageningen Academic Publishers. Wageningen, Netherlands: p p. 323.


Macfie HJ, Bratchell N, Greenhoff K, Vallis LV. 1989; Designs to balance the effect of order of presentation and first-order carry-over effects in hall tests. J Sens Stud. 4:129-148


Meilgaard MC, Carr BT, Civille GV. 1999; Sensory evaluation techniques. 3rd edCRC Press. New York, NY, USA: p p. 464


Murphy JM. 1992; What is branding?. In Branding: A key marketing tool. In: Murphy JM, editor.(ed)Palgrave Macmillan. London, UK: p p. 5


Nakamura Y, Goto TK, Tokumori K, Yoshiura T, Kobayashi K, Nakamura Y, Honda H, Ninomiya Y, Yoshiura K. 2011; Localization of brain activation by umami taste in humans. Brain Res. 1406:18-29


Nam KC. 2017; Development of new chicken breeds to diversify consumer market. Livest Food Sci Ind. 6:17-23.


Nam KC. 2019; The age of chicken breed recognition. Livest Food Sci Ind. 8:48-54.


Nelson P. 1970; Information and consumer behavior. J Polit Econ. 78:311-329


Nestrud MA, Lawless HT. 2011; Recovery of subsampled dimensions and configurations derived from napping data by MFA and MDS. Atten Percept Psychophys. 73:1266-1278


O’Reilly RA, Pannier L, Gardner GE, Garmyn AJ, Luo H, Meng Q, Miller MF, Pethick DW. 2020; Influence of demographic factors on sheepmeat sensory scores of American, Australian and Chinese consumers. Foods. 9:529


OECD-FAO. OECD-FAO agricultural outlook 2021–2030. Available from at Jul 19, 2021


Oliver P, Cicerale S, Pang E, Keast R. 2018; Comparison of quantitative descriptive analysis to the napping methodology with and without product training. J Sens Stud. 33e12331


Oude Ophuis PAM, Van Trijp HCM. 1995; Perceived quality: A market driven and consumer oriented approach. Food Qual Prefer. 6:177-183


Overberg J, Hummel T, Krude H, Wiegand S. 2012; Differences in taste sensitivity between obese and non-obese children and adolescents. Arch Dis Child. 97:1048-1052


Park MN, Hong EC, Kang BS, Kim HK, Kim JH, Na SH, Chae HS, Seo OS, Han JY, Jeong JH, HwangBo J. 2010; Chemical composition and meat quality of crossbred Korean native chickens (KNC). Korean J Poult Sci. 37:415-421


Park S, Kim N, Choi S, Moon J. 2020; The consumption patterns of Korean native chicken. Korean J Poult Sci. 47:247-254


Perrin L, Symoneaux R, Maître I, Asselin C, Jourjon F, Pagès J. 2008; Comparison of three sensory methods for use with the napping® procedure: Case of ten wines from Loire valley. Food Qual Prefer. 19:1-11


Risvik E, McEwan JA, Colwill JS, Rogers R, Lyon DH. 1994; Projective mapping: A tool for sensory analysis and consumer research. Food Qual Prefer. 5:263-269


Rural Development Administration. Chicken consumption and perception report. Available from board/ at Jul 20, 2021


Seo D, Lee JH. 2016; DNA markers for the genetic diversity in Korean native chicken breeds: A review. Korean J Poult Sci. 43:63-76


Seo S, Ahn HK, Jeong J, Moon J. 2016; Consumers’ attitude toward sustainable food products: Ingredients vs. packaging. Sustainability. 8:1073


Sow TMA, Grongnet JF. 2010; Sensory characteristics and consumer preference for chicken meat in Guinea. Poult Sci. 89:2281-2292


Steenkamp JBEM. 1990; Conceptual model of the quality perception process. J Bus Res. 21:309-333


Thompson JM, Pleasants AB, Pethick DW. 2005; The effect of design and demographic factors on consumer sensory scores. Aust J Exp Agric. 45:477-482


Torquati B, Tempesta T, Vecchiato D, Venanzi S. 2018; Tasty or sustainable? The effect of product sensory experience on a sustainable new food product: An application of discrete choice experiments on chianina tinned beef. Sustainability. 10:2795


Torrico DD, Jirangrat W, Wang J, Chompreeda P, Sriwattana S, Prinyawiwatkul W. 2018; Novel modelling approaches to characterize and quantify carryover effects on sensory acceptability. Foods. 7:186


Wilde LL. 1980; The economics of consumer information acquisition. J Bus. 53:S143-S158


Yoo IJ, Jeon KH, Park WM, Choi SY. 1998; Effect of heating conditions and additives on bone crumble and shelf-life of retorted Samgyetang. Korean J Food Sci Anim Resour. 19:19-26.


Zanoli R, Scarpa R, Napolitano F, Piasentier E, Naspetti S, Bruschi V. 2013; Organic label as an identifier of environmentally related quality: A consumer choice experiment on beef in Italy. Renew Agric Food Syst. 28:70-79


Zhang Y, Venkitasamy C, Pan Z, Liu W, Zhao L. 2017; Novel umami ingredients: Umami peptides and their taste. J Food Sci. 82:16-23