RESUMEN
To characterize human emotions, researchers have increasingly utilized Automatic Facial Expression Analysis (AFEA), which automates the Facial Action Coding System (FACS) and translates the facial muscular positioning into the basic universal emotions. There is broad interest in the application of FACS for assessing consumer expressions as an indication of emotions to consumer product-stimuli. However, the translation of FACS to characterization of emotions is elusive in the literature. The aim of this systematic review is to give an overview of how FACS has been used to investigate human emotional behavior to consumer product-based stimuli. The search was limited to studies published in English after 1978, conducted on humans, using FACS or its action units to investigate affect, where emotional response is elicited by consumer product-based stimuli evoking at least one of the five senses. The search resulted in an initial total of 1,935 records, of which 55 studies were extracted and categorized based on the outcomes of interest including (i) method of FACS implementation; (ii) purpose of study; (iii) consumer product-based stimuli used; and (iv) measures of affect validation. Most studies implemented FACS manually (73%) to develop products and/or software (20%) and used consumer product-based stimuli that had known and/or defined capacity to evoke a particular affective response, such as films and/or movie clips (20%); minimal attention was paid to consumer products with low levels of emotional competence or with unknown affective impact. The vast majority of studies (53%) did not validate FACS-determined affect and, of the validation measures that were used, most tended to be discontinuous in nature and only captured affect as it holistically related to an experience. This review illuminated some inconsistencies in how FACS is carried out as well as how emotional response is inferred from facial muscle activation. This may prompt researchers to consider measuring the total consumer experience by employing a variety of methodologies in addition to FACS and its emotion-based interpretation guide. Such strategies may better conceptualize consumers' experience with products of low, unknown, and/or undefined capacity to evoke an affective response such as product prototypes, line extensions, etc.
RESUMEN
In May 2016, labeling of certain nonintact mechanically tenderized beef (MTB) products was mandated in the United States. MTB products should be handled differently by the consumer because pathogens can be transferred from the exterior to the interior of the meat during the tenderization process. Without labeling, it is difficult to visually distinguish between some intact beef and MTB products, which is a concern because MTB products require higher internal cooking temperatures for safety. An exploratory study was conducted to understand consumer understanding of MTB products and consumer responses to the new label. Thirteen focus groups were convened in rural and urban settings across Virginia and North Carolina between December 2015 and May 2016. Sessions were audiorecorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed through constant-comparison thematic analysis. Although MTB products were commonly bought, prepared, and consumed, consumer awareness of MTB products and the MTB process was limited. Generally, the label confused participants, and they did not understand the message. Specifically, terminology such as "blade tenderized" and "mechanically tenderized" were preferred over the term "needle tenderized" on labels. Once explained, many individuals wanted more information and better messaging. Through a multiprong approach, other messaging methods (e.g., in stores, through technology, and with certifications) were highly valued by consumers and may result in increased message clarity. Ultimately, the intrinsic and extrinsic properties of the beef rather than the MTB product continued to be the primary guide for purchasing and preparation. This study is the first to be conducted regarding American perceptions of MTB products. An understanding of consumer awareness of MTB products and labels is needed to develop targeted risk messaging communication tools.