WHO BUYS CANNED SALMON,

AND WHY?

Circular 89

;;: UNITED STATES bEPARTMENT^Of THE InfEWl

:<XXx>0<:<Xx —

United States Department of the Interior, Fred A. Seaton, Secretary

Fish and Wildlife Service, Amie J, Suomela, Commissioner

Bureau of Commercial Fisheries, Donald L, McKeman, Director

WHO BUYS CANNED SALMON, AND WHY?

A Study of Consxmer Motivation in Tltree Cities

Prepai-ed in the Branch of Economics

United States Fish and Wildlife Service

Circular 89

Washington, £), G. : June I96O

ABSTRACT

This report contains the results of a marketing
research study directed toward the improvement of pro-
motional and merchandising techniques for the marketing
of canned salmon. Special emphasis is placed upon
motivational analysis using psychological techniques in
probing for information as to why consumers are attracted
to canned fishery products with certain styles of pack, taste,
color, or other attributes. The report contains suggestions
for regional promotional themes adapted to the needs of
specific markets for canned pink and red salmon.

PREFACE

While the trend of total canned fish production in the United
States has been generally upweurd since the end of World War II, the
fortunes of the various canned fish industries have been diverse.
Canned tuna, the leader, has been breaking production records but has
been encountering increasing ccanpetition from Japanese imports. An
acute supply problem grips the canned salmon industry and the market-
ing problems mainly ensue from a decline in the salmon runs. Canned
sardines, and particularly the CsLlifomia sardine industry, is con-
fronted with both supply problems £uid the loss of traditional markets.

Marketing research has something to offer the ceuaned fish
industries. Indeed, the most apparent conmon denominator in the
marketing problems of all these industries is their need for better
merchandising methods.

The prime objective of this market research study is to
aid the domestic canned fish industries to expand markets for their
products. Results and findings of the study are especieilly directed
toward the improvement of promotional and merchandising techniques.
However, the study has also a direct beeuring upon other important
aspects of ceuined fish marketing such as the adaptation of the
product to meet specific consumer preferences.

This report describes the results of a survey of the
motivational factors which influence the btiying habits of household
consumers of canned sailmon. The survey also examines the buying
habits of household consumers of canned tuna and sardines. Separate
reports have been issued for those products.

The study was made by the A. J. Wood Research Corporation
of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, under contract to the United States
Bureau of Commercial Fisheries. It was financed with funds made
available xinder the Saltonstall -Kennedy Act, approved July 1, 195^
(68 Stat. 376).

The survey was conducted under the general supei^sion
of Walter H. Stolting, Chief, Branch of Economics. Preliminary
statistical and planning work was done by Adolph Scolnick, Analytical
Statistician. The report was edited and adapted for publication by
Alton T, Murray and Preuis L. Widerstrom, Jr., Economists.

iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

Introduction l

Consumer preferences for caxined salmon: 2

Use of canned salmon 2

Can si ze preference 3

Color preference 3

Buying habits i;.

Serving habits ^

Recipe sources ^

Ordering salmon In public eating places 6

Reasons for not using or seldom using salmon 6

Canned salmon adveirtlslng 6

Personal chetracterl sties of salmon-user households 6

Motivational analysis : 7

Determining the product Image 7

Measuring the motivational difference 8

Index of possible Biarket gain 9

Observations based on computed Indexes of possible

market gain 9

Suggestions : 9

Tables 11

Statistical tables : 13

Use of canned salmon: 13

Table 1. --Which kind of canned fish do you like best? 13
Table 2. — IXiring the last twelve months have you

served csuined ssQjnon? 13

Table 3. — During the past four weeks, about how often

did you serve cemned salmon? ll»-

Table k. — Who in your family eats canned salmon? ik

Can size preference: 15

Table 5. — Which salmon can size do you buy? 15

Table 6. --How adequate is this salmon can size for

your purposes ? 15

Table 7. --Would you prefer another can size? l6

Table 8. --About what size can woxild you prefer? l6

Color preference : 17

Table 9« — Which color of canned salmon do you prefer? 17
Table 10. — Which color canned salmon do you like

better? 17

Table 11. — Do you usxially buy that color salmon or do

you sometimes buy another color? l8

Table 12. — Why do you sometimes buy a color other than

yovir preference? 19

TABLE OF CONTENTS - Continued

Page

Statistical tables: - Continued

Buying habits: 20

Table 13 • — The last time you bought canned salmon- -did

you plan to buy it before you went to the

store or did you decide on it at the

store? 20

Table l^*-. — What made you decide to buy it on impiilse? 20

Serving habits : 21

Table 15«--When do you serve salmon? 21

Table l6.--Wa8 salmon served in your heme when you

were a child? 21

Table l?. — What would induce you to use more salmon? . 22
Table l8. — If less expensive salmon had the skin and

bones removed, how would it influence your

salmon use? 22

Recipe 80iu:ces: 23

Table 19. — Have you ever used a recipe obtained from a

salmon can? 23

Table 20. — Have you ever used a recipe obtained from

em advertisement? 23

Ordering salmon in public eating places : 2k

Table 21. — Have you ordered salmon in a public eating

place in the last two months? 2k

Table 22. — Besides yourself, has anyone eating with

you ordered salmon in a public eating

place in the last two months? 2k

Reasons for not using or seldcM using salmon; 2^

Table 23. — Is there any special reason >rtiy you do not

use canned salmon? 23

Table 2k» — Did you ever use salmon in the past? 25

Table 25 . — Why did you stop using salmon? 26

Table 26. — Why do you serve salmon so seldom? 26

Table 27. — Did you use salmon more often in the past? 27
Table 28. — Why have you reduced the nvmber of times

you served it? 27

Table 29. — Does anyone living in the house like

salmon? 28

Canned salmon advertising: 29

Table 30. — Have you seen or heard amy advertising for

canned salmon? 29

Table 31. — Where have you seen or heetrd advertising

for canned salmon? 29

Characteristics : 30

Table 32. — Selected socio-economic characteristics of

households , horaemakers 30

TABIE OF CONTENTS - Continued

Page

Appendix : 3I

Survey methods : 3I

Questionnaire 21

Sample design 31

Field work 34

Data processing procedures 34

Sampling errors 35

Sample questionnaire 39

WHO BUYS CANNED SAIMON, AND WHY?

INTRODUCTION

In aarket research It is important to
know how many people do what. It is even
more important to know why.

The methodology of supplying answers
to how-many-people- do -^rtiat is well estab-
lished. The first part of this report is
concerned with the interpretation of the
results of household consumers' responses
to questions on what buying habits, serv-
ing habits, etc., they have. In effect,
this interpretation amounts to deciding
bow many household consimiers prefer par-
ticular attributes of canned salmon in
relation to other groups with different
preferences. The selection of a random
sample representative of all the house-
holders in the soreas surveyed was deter-
mined by statisticELl methods in consnon use.
Also included in the first section of the
report is the analysis of consumer re-
sponses to the use of two related motiva-
tional research techniques- -the open ques-
tion and the probe. Itese techniques
represent an initial step in the process
of learning the why of consumer marketing
behavior.

While the study of marketing behavior
over several decades has developed a number
of methods of investigating the vby of con-
sumer habits, motivational research is
relatively new. Practitioners in the field
of motivationaLL research sometimes disagree
as to the emphasis to be placed upon the
special techniques drawn tram any one of
the social sciences such as statistics,
psychology, economics, and sociology. The
principal techniques of motivational re-
search in the field of consumer marketing
behavior, however, are derived frcan
psychology.

The second part of this report is
concerned with the results of the motiva-
tional analysis of the marketing behavior
of consumers of canned salmon based on
other reseeurch techniques. Motivational
Hiarket surveys require the services of a
staff trained to interrogate consumers
with special probing techniques, and a
highly skilled reseeurch staff is needed
to interpret the results of the recorded
responses. Moreover, motivational re-
search studies are much more expensive
than consuBier surveys using conventioneil
statistical methods. IMs situation has
a direct bearing upon the size of the
motivational research survey irtiich can
be made for a fixed sum available for
consumer resesurch. As a ccmpromise be-
tween the maxltmnn population coverage to
find out how many people do what with
canned fish and the limitation Imposed by
the cost of motivational research into ^y
they used it, three urban meirkets were
selected for study instead of a national
survey.

The populations under study consisted
of households within the urbanized areas of
Boston, Massachusetts J Detroit, Michigan;
and Birmingham, Alabama. In addition, Negro
households located in the rural areas of
Orangeburg County, South Carolina were sur-
veyed. Negro households in rural areas of
the southern states represent an important
market for canned sardines. The Orangeburg
County results will be summarized in the
saI^ii^e report which will show the cross-
classification of various marketing data by
race for Birmingham and Detroit. A western
city was not included in the survey because
of a lack of funds to cover the cost of
interviews. Area probability samples were
selected to represent the populations
covered and interviews were completed with
the homemaker or person mainly responsible
for planning the meals as follows :

Area

Blrm1 ngham
Boston
Detroit
Orangeburg County

Number of Intervjevs

585
553
609
200

The interviewing phase of this study
was carried out between March 13, 1959 smi
May k, 1959-

Specifically, the survey was designed
to elicit detailed answers to such ques-
tions as : why consusers decided to buy
or not to buy certain canned fishery items;
irtiether or not shoppers for canned fish and
shellfish were motivated by advertisements
or labels; the influence of income on buy-
ing habits and other marketing factors.
Then there were the how-many-people -do -what
questions to find out consvmiers' prefer-
ences for size of can; type of package;
kind of oil in ^rtiich fish sure canned;
color; textvire; and other characteristics
of canned fishery products.

CONSUMER PREFERENCES FOR CANNED SALMON 1/
Use of Canned Salmon

Salmon is the second most popular
canned fish among constuoers in Boston and
Detroit, but in Birmingham salmon and tuna
are about equal in consumer esteem. In
Boston, only 17 percent of all respondents
in the survey indicated that they liked
salmon best; ^ percent named tuna. In
Detroit, 27 percent like salmon best; kj
percent preferred tuna. In Birmingham,
salmon and tuna tied for the first place
with k2 percent each. Canned shrimp and
sardines trailed feu: behind salmon and tuna
in order of consximer preference in all
three cities.

With regard tc actual use, the survey
revealed that 13 percent of all households
in Birmingham, 26 percent in Detroit, and
U2 percent in Boston had not used canned
salmon in the 12 months prior to the inter-
view. For purposes of statistical analysis,

these households were classified as "never
users" of canned salmon. Of those who had
used canned salmon in the 12 months prior
to the interview, 61; percent in Birmingham,
5? percent in Detroit, and k3 percent in
Boston had used it in the h weeks immedi-
ately prior to the interview. These latter
households were classified as "salmon
users." Those who had used canned salmon
in the past 12 months but not within the
past four weeks were termed "sporadic
users . "

Percentage of
respondent*

60 r-

50
kO
30
20 -
10 -

{■■■■■*

1/ Tables containing data referred to in
this section are given on pages 13-30 and
an explanation of the tables on page 11.

Birmingham Boston Ottrolt

t:::-:!:! salmon I I tima

FIGURE I. —CONSUMER PREFERENCES FOR
CANNED SAMON, CANNED TUNA

The salmon users were further divided
Into light and heavy user groups. The
"light users" are defined as those who
used scQmon one or two times in the four
weeks Immediately prior to the interview
and the "heavy users" as those who had
served it three times or more in that
period. The distribution of these user
groups in the three cities Is summarized
in the following table. (Note: the
reader should keep in mind while reading
the following text and tables that "salmon
users" are by definition all respondents
representing households who had used

canned salmon within the past four weeks.
The term, therefore, includes both light
users and heavy users.)

DISTRIBOTION OF SAIWON USER C»OUPS,

BY FREQUENCY OF USE, BIRMINGBAM,

BOSTON, AND IffiTROIT, 1959

Classification
of user groups

Birmingham

Boston

Detroit

Never users
Sporadic users
Light users 1/
Heavy users 1/

Percent

13
32
37

18

Percent

k2

33

19

6

Percent

26
32
31
11

Total

100

100

100

l/ Referred to in text as "salmon users".

lliere was a slight variation in the
frequency of serving canned salmon in the
past four weeks among the three cities.
The salmon-user households in Birmingham
averaged 2.3 servings per household during
this period, compared with 2.0 servings in
both Boston and Detroit.

Salmon Is eaten by all family members
In 88 percent of the salmon-user households
in Detroit, dh percent in Birmln^iam, and
73 percent in Boston.

Can Size Preference

The majority of salmon users in
Birmingham, 68 percent, and in Detroit, 78
percent, usvially buy the product packed in
1 -pound cans. TSxe 7-3/'* ounce can size
ranks next in popularity among one-third
of the Birmingham users and one-sixth of
those in Detroit. In Boston, consumer
preference is divided almost evenly be-
tween the l-po\ind size, U8 percent, and
the 7-3/U-ovuice size, U5 percent. The
small 3-3A-ounce size is purchased by
only 10 percent of the Boston users, 7 per-
cent of the Detroit group, and 1 percent in
Blimlngham.

Consumers are well satisfied with their
can size selections. Approximately 90 per-
cent of the salmon users in all three
cities were of the opinion that the

preferred can size was "about right" for
their needs.

When the salmon users were asked
specifically if they would prefer another
c&a size, approximately 11 percent in each
of the cities answered in the affirmative.
For the most paz*t, the salmon users who
would prefer another can size Indicated
that they would choose a larger can than
Is now available. More than 60 percent
of the users who would like emother can
size in Birmingham and Detroit stated that
they would select a can of 20 ovmces or
more. The proportion stating a preference
for another can size in Boston was too
small to permit a percentage breakdown to
Indicate the size preferred.

Color Preference

Birmln^iam is predcmlnantly a pink-
salmon 2/ market; 85 percent of the salmon
users buy pink sEdmon and only 16 percent
buy red seOmon 3/C On the other hand,
Boston is a strong red-salmon market, with
89 percent usually buying that color smd
only 13 percent pink salmon. In Detroit,
both colors sure bovight by sizable propor-
tions of the user households; red, 60 per-
cent cmd pink, k6 percent.

"Hie salmon color preference
distribution is similar to the actual buy-
ing by color in the three cities. Red
salmon is liked better than pink salmon by
95 percent or moire of the red salmon buyers
in each of the three cities. However, in
Detroit, as many as 20 percent of the pink
salmon buyers indicated that they liked
red salmon better than pink salmon. In
Birmingham, only 6 percent of the pink
salmon bviyers liked red salmon better.

Loyalty to the salmon color preferred
is generally strong with 93 percent in
Boston, 87 percent in Birmingham, and 8U
percent in Detroit usually buying their

2/ In this report canned "pink" salmon
iicludes chum, keta, and other species
normally retailing at lower prices than
"red" salmon.

3/ In this report canned red salmon in-
cludes sockeye and other salmon classed as
red salmon when canned.

color preference. In Birmingham and DetrolJi
there is less loyalty to red salmon among
users ^o prefer that color than exists for
pink salmon. Twenty-seven percent of the
red salmon preferrers in Blrmlnj^am some-
times bviy pink salmon; only 8 percent who
prefer pink salmon sometimes buy red salmon.
The ccsnparable proportions in Detroit sure
20 percent and 7 percent respectively.

Percentage of
respondents

100 -
80 -
60
1»0
20

Bizmingham Boston Detroit
^^3 pink I I red

FIGURE II.— CONSUMER PREFERENCES IDR
PINK SALMON AND RED SALMON

An important technique used in
motivational research is the "open
question" - one which seeks the
why of consumer behavior. Such
questions permit the respondent
to reply freely and do not re-
strict his choice of euiswers to
the limited categories imposed
by the direct or closed type. If
the respondent's reply Is meaning-
ful it gives a reason as to why
he thinks or feels the way he does.
A response of the type "Just be-
cause I like it" would not be con-
sidered adequate and it would be

the responsibility of the inter-
viewer to focus the respondent on
more specific are&B in which to
ansver. The focusing process is
known as probing; it is not used
in Instances where the initial
reply is deemed satisfactory by
the specleLlly trained interviewer.
In cases where probing is used,
it must be handled skillfully so
as not to bias the respondent's
soiswer.

The first open question asked of
salmon users sought the reasons for changes
in their purchase of canned salmon from red
to pink or pink to red. Lower price was
the major reason given for buying other
than the preferred color.

Buying Habits

For the most part, the salmon users
in the three cities stated that they had
planned to buy canned salmon before they
went to the store, not after their arrival
there. One-fifth of the Birmingham and
Detroit purchasers reported making their
decision to buy while in the store; only
one- tenth of the Boston users were in this
category.

Open questions and the probing
technique also may be used >rtien
attempting to ascertain consumer
motives for impulse purchases.
Specific, spontaneous responses
of a type elicited only after
skilled probing, are important
sources of information for those
Interested in expanding the
market for canned salmon.

Impulse buyers were asked what made
them decide to buy salmon; 59 percent in
Birmingham and 39 percent in Detroit indi-
cated that they "saw it and Just bou^^t it,"
In addition, 56 percent in Detroit men-
tioned "special price or sale" as their
reason, as ccanpared with ik percent in
Birmingham. The number of impulse buyers
in Boston was too ""tn for a percentage
breakdown indicating their motives.

Serving Habits

Eighty-eight percent of the salmon
users in Detroit, 79 percent in Mnainghan,
and 73 percent in Boston indicated that
dinner is the meal at vhich canned salmon
is served most frequently. The product is
populau: also for lunch at home; k2 percent
of the users in Birmingham and Boston serve
saQjnon for lunch, compared vlth 31 percent
in Detroit. Canned salmon is not used ex-
tensively for snacXs, lunch taken to work,
or for picnics. In Birmingham, 20 percent
of the user homemakers serve saOjKsn for
breakfast. No respondents in Boston re-
ported this particular use of the product.
In Detroit, the proportion of breakfast
users was only 3 percent.

A very laurge percentage of the home-
makers in user households — nearly 9 out of
10 in each of the three cities — indicated
that salmon vas served in their hemes vben
they were children.

Tte replies of consumers to an
open question, and their responses
to the use of the probing technique,
revealed the relative Importance
of price reductions as a motive
for the more frequent use of
canned salmon.

A lower price was mentioned as an in-
centive for increasing their use of canned
salaon by kk percent of the users in
Detroit, 37 percent in Boston, and 36 per-
cent in Blrmlnghnm. Nearly one-fifth of
the users in Boston indicated that the
removal of the Llack skin smd bones at
the cannery would provide em inducement
for Increased salmon servings; only 3 per-
cent in Birmingham and h percent in Detroit
expressed similar views. Forty-eight per-
cent of the Birminghaa users, k2 percent
in Boston, and UO percent in Detroit stated
that nothing would Induce them to serve
more canned ssLlmon. "Already use it
enough" and "don't cblT9 for it too often"
were the leading reasons given.

In giving their answers to a direct
question, more than one-fourth of the
salmon -user homemakers in each of the three
cities indicated that they would use larger
quantities, of the less-expensive salmon if
the skin and bones were removed. Boston,

with 36 percent, had the largest
proportion of positive responses to
this question.

P«re«nta|[* of
■alaon users

Il2

-

36

30

-

Zk

-

18

-

12

-

6

-

0

BlrmtnghsM

Boston

Detroit

FIGURE III. —PERCENTAGE OF SAUION

USERS WHO STATED THAT NOTHING WOULD

INDUCE THEM TO SERVE MORE SAMON

Recipe Sources

Only one -fifth of the salmon users In
the three cities Indicated that they had
used a salmon recipe obtained frca a
salmon csm. llxe proportion that reported
using salmon recipes from aidvertlsements
was somewhat larger, amounting to about
one-third of the users in Boston and
Detroit and one-fourth In Blnalngham.

Ordering Salaon In Public Eating Places

Only 5 percent or less of the salmon-
user respondents In each of the cities
reported that they had ordered salmon In
a public eating place during the tvo months
preceding the interview. Approximately the
same proportion Indicated that someone else
eating with them had placed a sliollar order
within the same period.

Reasons for Wot Using
or Seldom Using Salmon

Motivational research
techniques - the open question
emd the probe - were used to
great advantage ^en the sur-
vey sou^t the reasons for not
uslng^ seldom using or dis-
continuing the vise of canned
salmon.

Ihe "never users" (those who had not
used salmon in the 12 months prior to the
Interview) were asked if there was emy
special reason why they did not use salmon.
A substemtial majority of these hcmemakers-
80 percent in Boston, 68 percent in Detroit,
and 6k percent in Birmingham — gave reasons
indicating the product was unattractive.
"Price too high" was mentioned by 24 per-
cent in Detroit and by 11 percent in both
Birmingham and Boston. Reasons related to
health were given by 18 percent in Birming-
ham, 10 percent in Boston, and 8 percent
in Dstroit.

More than one-half of the "never-
users" in Birmingham and Detroit and 37
percent in Boston had used canned salmon
some time in the past. The respondents In
this group indicated that they had stopped
using the product for one or more of the
following reasons: did not like it; a
reduction in the size of the family; too
expensive; health or diet reasons.

Tbe reasons for using salmon infre-
quently as reported by the "sporadic users"
(those who had served salmon in the 12
months prior to the interview) dealt msdnly
with the unattractiveness of the product.
Approximately one -half of the responses
given by sporadic users were in this
category. Price was mentioned by 29 per-
cent in Detroit, I9 percent in Birmingham,
and 12 percent in Boston. Nearly one -half

of the sporadic users in Birmingham and
Detroit, and one-fourth in Boston indi-
cated that they had used salmon more
frequently in the past. Tbe current
practice of decreasing their servings of
salmon was attributed to high price or a
reduction in the size of the family.

More than 8 out of 10 of the
Birmingham non-users ("never users" ajid
"sporadic users" combined) and 7 out of
10 of the Detroit non -users reported that
at least one member of the household liked
salmon, a lower ration was observed for
those answering this question in the
Boston group.

Canned Salmon Advertising

Only about one-third of the homemakers
in Birmingham and Detroit and one-fourth of
those in Boston have seen or heard any
advertising for canned salmon. Newspapers
were mentioned most frequently by those
exposed to advertising in Birmingham and
Detroit, followed by magazines and tele-
vision. In Boston, magazines were men-
tioned most frequently, followed by
newspapers and television.

Tb.» proportion of respondents ^o said
they had seen or heeurd advertising for
canned salmon Increased with the frequency
of their salmon consumption. In Birmlnghm^
this Increase was from 2k percent among the
"never users" to k3 percent for the "heavy
users"; in Boston, from ik percent to 3^
percent; and in Detroit, from 28 percent
to 37 percent.

Personal Characteristics
of Salmon-User Households

The socio-economic characteristics of
the households and homemakers in all three
cities differed considerably with respect
to race, religion, income, nativity of
parents, employment status, and education.
In Birmingham, 36 percent of the house-
holds were Negro, compared with 19 percent
in Detroit emd only 2 percent in Boston.

In Birmingham 6 percent were Catholic
as conQ>ared to 3^^ percent in Detroit and
38 percent in Boston. Ibe remainder com-
prised families of the Protestant religion,
for the most part. A significantly hl^er
proportion of the Birmingham families have

a lower income than is the case for Boston
and Detroit. Only 3 percent of the
Birmingham respondents had one or both of
their parents bom outside of the United
States compared to U2 percent in Boston
and 23 percent in Detroit. A slightly-
higher proportion of the Birmingham respond-
ents were en^jloyed as conpared to the other
two cities. Finally, a higher proportion
of the Boston respondents received an edu-
cation beyond the eighth grade than was the
case in Birmingham and Detroit.
Percent*^ of
r«*pon4anta

lu)

35

30

-

25

-

20

-

15

5

-

1 1

Boston Ortrolt

FIGURE IV . —PERCENTAGE OF
NEGRO RESPONDENTS

The personal characteristics of the
households and homeraakers were tabulated
for each of the canned salmon consumption
groups defined for this study. These
tabulations revealed frequency of canned
salmon usage in these cities to be asso-
ciated with the following characteristics :
marital status, size of household, occupa-
tion of respondent's husband, age of home-
maker, family income, education of home-
maker, nativity of parents of horaemaker,
religion of family, and race.

In Binningham, the salmon users groups
contained a higher proportion of: manual
laborers; homemakers 26 to kS years of age;
a family income ranging from $5,000 to

$7,000; homemakers with 8 to 12 years of
education; and Negro families. In addition,
Detroit users included a higher proportion
of homemakers bom in a southern state;
manual laborers did not comprise a signifi-
cant percentage of the Detroit users. Bos-
ton users respondents included a larger
number of homemakers with a college educa-
tion; more families in the highest income
group; and a larger number of families
affiliated with a religion other than
Catholic or Protestant.

A statistical summary of findings
based on classification of the data by
personal characteristics of the households,
together with data on product image men-
tioned in the next section, will be made
available for a limited time upon request
to the Fish and Wildlife Service by persons
having a need for such data.

MOTIVATIONAL ANALYSIS

The motivational analysis in this sur-
vey was carried out by two different methods .
The first method was to ask the respondents
open questions as to why they use or do not
use salmon so that they could spontaneously
mention any reason or motive. The inter-
viewers, who were all familiar with probing
techniques, were instructed to probe as
deeply as possible for any reasons which the
respondents did not bring out immediately.
There was a series of such open questions.
The users were asked what would induce them
to serve more salmon; non-users were asked
why they do not use salmon; those who had
stopped using salmon were asked why they
had stopped. The sporadic users were asked
why they used salmon so seldom, those who
now use salmon less often than in the past
were asked why they had reduced the number
of times they served it. Similarly, there
were open questions as to why people liked
their preferred can size; their preferred
color; d.nd why they made impulse purchases.
The responses to these open questions (as
well as the responses to the more usual
direct questions) have been summarized in
the first part of this report.

Determining the
Product Image~

The second method which was used to
study motivations is statistical and
requires some technical explanation. The
first step in this analysis was to deter-
mine the "image" of the product — that is,
what each respondent thought of salmon.

vfaat characteristics she attributes to it,
vhat associations the product evokes.
Therefore, each respondent vas asked
whether she agreed or disagreed with a
series of stateanents, each representing a
characteristic of s«Qjnion, for example:
"saLnon has a good flavor."

The motivational technique used
in this phase of the analysis is
known as the "guided association
question." Althou^ the respond-
ent is asked only whether or not
she agrees or disagrees with the
statement, the interviewer actual-
ly records the intensity of the
answer. Thus, strong agreement
or disagreement (as well as less
intensely expressed feelings or
opinions) is noted by the inter-
viewer. In addition, the state-
ments on the questionnaire were
scmetimes phrased positively and
sometimes negatively — as for
example: "Salmon has an un-
pleasant smell." This was done
in order to minimize irtiat is
called a "halo" or clustering
effect whereby a favorable atti-
tude toward a product tends to
make respondents attribute eLLl
favorable characteristics to the
product. The skill and training
of the interviewer are as impor-
tant to the proper handling of
guided association questions as
these requirements are when deal-
ing with open questions and the
probing technique.

Birmingham and Boston hcmemakers have
a somewhat different image of canned
salmon, according to the analysis of the
data obtained in the product image phase
of the study. It should be recalled that
Birmingham is pirlmarlly a plnk-saJmon mar-
ket and Boston, a red-salmon market.
Detroit, a mixed market for the two salmon
colors, ravaals an image of salmon which
is intermediate between the two extremes.

More than 8^ percent of the homemakers
in Biimin^^iam suad Detroit consider that
canned salmon is a convenient foodjis not ten
troublesome to prepare; is not hard to make
look good; and is a food of hij^ quality.
As many as three -fourths of the homemakers
in these cities are of the opinion that

8

salmon has a good flavor, is not
undesirably oily, and has a nice appearance
in the can.

In Boston, on the other hand, the
proportion of hcmemakers who agree that
salmon Is a convenient food is only 6l
percent, compared with 89 percent in
Birmingham and 90 percent in Detroit.
Fewer of the Boston homemakers (by at
least 10 percentage points) attribute
the characteristics of quality, appear-
ance, and ease of preparation to salmon
than is the case in Birmingham or Detroit.
In addition, as many as 77 percent of the
Boston homemakers consider salmon not to
be a food for poor people, compared with
^8 percent In Birmingham and 62 percent
in Detroit. Exactly the same proportion
(77 percent) feel that canned salmon is
only good if it is a well-known brand,
compared with 62 percent in Birmingham
and 70 percent in Detroit. About 5 cjut
of 8 of the homemakers in Boston and
Detroit consider canned salmon to be
expensive; only k^ percent of the
Bimlngham homemakers hold similar
opinions .

Rather wide differences of opinion
occur among the three cities for the items
"leaves a bad odor in the refrigerator,"
"has a nice ajipearance in the can," "has
many uses, " "Is not eaten mainly by manual
laborers," and "is used a great deaO. by
Negroes."

Measuring the
Motivational Difference

The aim of motivational analysis is to
determine the characteristics ^rtilch have
the greatest influence on the behavior of
the respondent. Tbe approach used in this
study to measure the strength of a motive
was first to determine the ratio of heavy
users among those who agree with the state-
ment and compare it with the ratio of
heavy users among those who do not agree
with it. The difference between these
ratios, which will be called the motiva-
tional difference. Indicates iriiether
agreeing with the statement has Influence
and measures the extent of the motivational
strength of the stataaent. The greater the
difference between the ratios, the stronger
the influence of the specific statement.
The selection of heavy user groups is

Justified because there is an interest in
converting not only the never users into
regular users but also to transform the
light users into heavy users of canned
salmon.

In addition, it should be recalled that
Birmingham is primarily a pink- salmon
market, Boston a red-seOmon market, and
Detroit a mixed red salmon and pink salmon
market.

There is considerable agreement among
the respondents in the three cities regard-
ing the primary motives for using canned
salmon. "Good flavor" is the leading
motive in all three cities suid is clearly
the most important. "Salmon has many uses,"
"is not hard to make look good," "is not
undesirably oily, " and "is a food of high
quality" are among the leaders in each city.
Ease of preparation is much more important
in Birmingham and Detroit than In Boston.
On the other hand, the sense qualities of
aftertaste and smell axe somevhat more
Important In the latter city.

Index of Possible
Market Gain

As a third step, the extent to vhlch
a motivating characteristic is already
attributed to the product by hosBemakers
must be measured. £/ Conversely, the pro-
portion of homemakers vho are to be con-
vinced that canned salmon has a specific
desirable quality must be established. It
is in this group that the potential market
gain is greatest. The result of multiply-
ing the motivational difference by the
potential to be convinced yields an index
of the possible market gain.

Observations Based on
Computed Indexes of
Possible Market Gain

Only the items "salmon has many uses,"
"salmon is eaten often by sick people," and
"salmon has a good flavor" are among the
leading Indexes for the three cities. "Oie
remaining items are listed for only one or
two of the cities. This is expledned for
the most part by the fact that the survey
cities are separated widely and located in
different regions of the country. The
variations in the listings among cities are
a reflection of differences in socio-eco-
nomic characteristics and market behavior.

Ij/ Ihere is no need to try to convince
that sector of the public that a prod-
uct has a certain characteristic when
everyone within the sector recognizes
that this Is the case.

Four of the five leading indexes for
Boston and Detroit sure the same. Biree of
these four are "salmon has a good flavor,"
"salmon has a pleasant aftertaste," and
"salmon does not leave a bad odor in the
refrigerator." None of these items
appears among the leaders for Birmin^iam,
although "salmon does not have an unpleas-
ant smell" is coomon to both Birmingham
and Boston in the over-all listings.

"Hie idea that salmon is not expensive
compared with other canned fish is impor-
tant in the red- salmon markets of Boston
and Detroit.

Pink-salmon bremd differences are not
considered Important. A leading index in
Birmingham and Detroit (a predominantly
pink-salmon market and a mixed pink and
red salmon market, respectively) indicates
that salmon need not be a well-known brand
to be considered good by these constmiers.

It is significant to note that the
items "salmon is a food of high quality, "
"salmon is a convenient food," "salmon is
used by Inexperienced cooks," and "salmon
is a food for poorer people" are not listed
among the leading indexes for any of the
three cities.

In Birmingham and Boston, it is
advantageous to convince consumers that
canned salmon is a good diet food.

SUGGESTIONS

The following suggestions have been
derived from the auELLysis smd sxmmary of
the data:

Only a relatively small proportion of
the consuming public has been exposed to
prcmotlonal or advertising material for
canned salmon. There is also evidence that
a consumer educational program of consider-
able magnitude is necessary if the use of
salmon is to be Increased to any appreci-
able degree. Because of the limited

budgets of Individual salmon packers. It
would be advisable for them to channel
advertising and prcmotional activities
throu^ a central agency of an industry
association. A coordinated effort of this
sort would enable packers to conduct a
consistent, coherent, and more widespread
promotional campaign.

Consumer awareness of the varteties of
ways in which the product can be prepared
and served is tm important factor connected
with increasing the use of salmon. Tie
proposed educational campaign should
emphasize the many attractive mead.s which
can be prepared with the product. Salmon
is considered to be a convenient food by
many consumers at the present time; such a
favorable attitude provides a firm founda-
tion for prcanoting new and improved
methods of using it.

The high quality attributes of salmon
are recognized by a large proportion of the
consuming public. A strong motivational
influence is exerted also by the opinion
that salmon is a "health food" — that it is
used by dieters and by sick people. Vie
current public concern regeurding the
association of heart disease with fatty
foods is another reason for stressing the
product as one that is "better for youj" a
modem, tasty food that is nourishing,
health-promoting, and easily digested.

The proportion of consumers who order
ssQmon in a public eating place is extreme-
ly small. Special promotional material,
designed for restaurant owners and cooks,
should be prepared and distributed. Tbe
primary objective of this phase of the
program would be to increase the variety
and frequency of salmon offerings on
restaurant menus.

Consumer use of salmon as a breakfast
food is very limited at the present time.
Only 20 percent of the users in Birmin^am
and practically none in Boston and Detroit
reported serving the product for breakfast.
An educational campaign that would point
out this ewLditional use could result in an
increase in total salmon consumption.

The selection of Blraingham, Boston,
and Detroit was made, in part, with the
intention of giving representation to three
regions of the country — the South,

Northeast, and North Central — rather than
to three particular cities. VJhen viewed
from this perspective it should be noted
that the factors with the greatest poten-
tial for motivating cons\miers to become
heavy users of salmon axe quite different
for the three eireas. Only three motiva-
tional characteristics appecu: among the
leaders for the three cities; thus the
problem of increasing salmon consumption
cannot be solved by the excltislve xise of
a single national advertising program. In
addition, there are markets where the pref-
erence for pink salmon pre dnm1 nates; in
others, red salmon; and in still others,
a mixture of the pink and red packs. Ad-
vertising media which could be regulated
to suit the needs of a specific market or
region would aid packers in promoting
increased salmon sales.

Regional promotional themes should be
develoi>ed for Boston and Detroit stressing
the pleasant aftertSLSte of salmon and the
fact that the product does not leave a bad
odor in the refrigerator. Red salmon
should be advertised as a "value food" in
Boston and Detroit in order to combat the
attitude that it is expensive compared
with other canned fish.

Ibe introduction of 6uiother can size
for salmon is not recommended at this time.
The limited demand for larger can sizes
can be met by arranging special multiple
can "deals" at the retail level. Special
combination offers of the l6-ounce can and
the 3-3A-o»ince can, the l6-ounce can and
the 7-3A-ounce can, or the 3-3A-ounce
can and the 7-3A-ounce can should be made
occasionally. By means of such a sales
technique, users lAo are concerned with
can sizes and the amount of salmon per can
would be induced to buy the product more
often.

An effort should be made to Improve
packing methods. The removal of larger
quantities of skin and bones should combat
certain vinfavorable associations presently
connected with the product, such as
unpleasant smell euid unsatisfactory
appearance .

It is apparent from the results of
the Borvej that the major promotional
activities of salmon packers should be
directed toward persuading non-users to

10

buy and serve the product. Thus the problem
differs substantially frcm that confronting
tuna packers; tuna promotion should stress
Bore frequent servings by eLLl user groups- -
particularly light and sporadic t\ina users.

A large proportion of the salmon non-
usera in the Boston "red salmon market"
indicated that they considered the product
to be too expensive. Pink saQjaon should
be marketed extensively in such areas In
order to overcame this unfavorable atti-
tude. Many of the users who presently
serve pink salmon report that they like it.

TABI£S

The tables showing the percentage
distribution of the responses to each of
the questions pertinent to this report are
included in the next section. A weighted
base was employed for the computation of
each percentage distribution. This base is
shown at the bottom of each table column.
Weighting the actual number of interviews
completed in each city was necessary since
a small number of the san^jling units were
sub-sampled to avoid an excessive number
of interviews in any one interviewing

assignment, llils procedure was necessary
in those sample area segments which had
grown in number of households considerably
since 1950. In addition, the total Detroit
area was divided into tones iriilch were
either predominately white or Ifegro with
the former sampled at one -half the rate of
the latter zone; weighting was employed to
restore the proportionality of the race
distribution In this city.

No weighting was attempted for house-
holds selected for the sample but not
interviewed (refusals, unable to contact,
etc . ) . Olie actual number of completed
interviews €uid the wei^ted base for the
total respondent population In each city
are shown belov.

City

Blraln^iaB

Boston

Detroit

Actual number
of Intervievs

585
553
609

Weighted
biLse

669

572
916

Percentage distributions were computed
irtienever the weighted base was 25 or more.

11

12

STATISTICAL TABLES

Use of Canned Salmon

TABI£ 1.- -WHICH KIND OF CANNED FISH DO YOU LIKE BEST?

Kind of canned fish

All respondents

Birmingham Boston Detroit

Tuna
Salmon
Sardines
Shrimp
Don't know

Weighted base

Percent Percent Percent

100

k2

k2

5

3

8

(669)

100

56
17

k
Ik

9

(572)

100

hi
2rj

6
11

9

(916)

TABLE 2. --DURING THE LAST TWELVE MONTHS
HAVE YOU SERVED CANNED SAIMON?

Response

All respondents

Birmingham

Boston

Detroit

Percent

Percent

Percent

100

100

100

87

58

Ih

13

U2

26

(669)

(572)

(916)

Yes

No
Weighted base

13

Use of Canned Sadmon

TABLE 3.- -DURING THE PAST FOUR WEEKS, ABOUT
HOW OFTEN DID YOU SERVE CANNED SAD40N?

Number of times

Those vho have served canned
salmon vithln last 12 months

Birmingham

Boston

Detroit

Percent

Percent

Percent

100

100

100

21

19

25

22

13

17

8

3

6

9

6

7

k

2

1

36

57

^3

(1)

(1)

1

time

times

times

times

or more times
Did not serve
Don't know

Weighted base
Average (last h veeks)

(581)
2.3

(333)

2.0

(681)

2.0

l/ Less than one percent.

TABLE 4." WHO IN YOUR FAMIIY EATS CANNED SAD40N?

Family member

Salmon users

Birmingham Boston Detroit

Percent Percent Percent

Entire family
Husbeind
Respondent
Children
Other adults

Weighted base

(1)

(1)

Ok

73

9

13

13

2l»

7

7

0

3

(370)

(l'*3)

(1)

7
12

7

1

(388)

l/ Totals more than 100 percent as some respondents gave more than
one ansver.

Ik

Can Sixe Preference

TABI£ 5.--WHICB SAIMON CAN SIZE DO YOU BUY?

Can size

Salmon users

RLmtlnghaa Boston Detroit

3 -3 A ounce
7-3A ounce (flat)
16 ounce (tall)
Don't know

Weighted base

Percent Percent Percent

(1)

1
33
68
(2)

(370)

(1)
10

ha

0

(11^3)

(1)

7

17
78

0

(388)

1/ Totals more than 100 percent as some respondents gave more than

one answer.
2/ Less than one percent.

TABLE 6.— HOW ADE^ATE IS TEIS SAIMOH CAN SIZE FOR YOUR PURPOSES?

Responses

Salmon users

Birmingham Boston Detroit

Percent Percent Percent

About right
Too small
Too large
Don't know

Weighted base

100

91
5
3
2

(370)

100
91

6
3

1

100

86
7
k
k

(H*3) (388)

15

Can Size Preference

Responses

TABIE 7.— WOULD lOU PREFER AKOTHER CAN SIZE?

SeLLmon users

Blrml ngham Boston Detroit

Percent Percent Percent

100

100

100

Yes

No

Don't know

Weighted base

U 10 11

88 87 85

13^

(370) ilk3)

(388)

TABIE 8.— ABOUT WHAT SIZE CAN WOULD YOU PREFER?

Ceui size

Salmon users vho would
prefer another can size

Birmlnghsffl

Boston

Detroit

Percent

Percent

Percent

(1)

(2)

100

18

_

26

10

-

21

15

-

23

35

-

21

0

.

0

28

-

9

12 ovmce (3/*^ pound)

20 ounce

2k ounce (1-1/2 potmd)

32 ounce or more

Other size

Don't know

Weighted base

(to)

(15)

(U3)

l/ Totals more than 100 percent as som^ respondents gave more than

one answer.
2/ Percentages ajce omitted because the data are not statistically

significant.

16

Color Preference

TABI£ 9.— WHICH COLOR OF CANNED SAIMON DO YOU PREFER?

Color

Salmon users

Birmingham Boston Detroit

Percent Percent Percent

Red
Pink
Don't know

Weighted base

(1)

16

85

(2)

(1)

89

13

0

(1)

60
k6

(2)

(370) (11*3) (388)

l/ Totals more than 100 percent as some respondents gave more than

one answer.
2/ Less than one percent.

TABLE 10.— WHICH COLOR CANNED SAIMON DO YOU LIKE BETTER?

Color

Salmon users lAio buy

Boston

Detroit

Birmingham

Red Pink Red Pink Red Pink

Red
Pink
Don't know

Weighted base

Per- Per-
cent cent

Per- Per-
cent cent

Per- Per-
cent cent

100 100 (1) (2) 100 100

95

6

99

97

20

5

93

2

3

79

0

1

1

(3)

1

(59) (313) (127) (19) (231) (177)

l/ Totals more than 100 i>ercent as some respondents gave more than

one answer.
2/ Percentages axe omitted because the data axe not statistically

significant.
3/ Less than one percent.

17

^

a
u

h

-a

1

+>

u

fl

0)

4>

Ph

0

,

+>

vt

c

0)

V

^

0

1

+>

Fh

a

V

4)

P^

0

1

+>

h

a

«>

0)

P^

0

1

-p

u

a

<u

0)

(X,

0

,

■p

u

Ci

(U

«

C14

0

I -p
^ a

On O

I +>

0) 4>

(1< O

0) v
Oh O

8

8 S8° S

III 00

ooincvj

\r\

ON

CVJ

•

»-i

■p

0

•— ^

tH

HOD H

CO

4-1

o\

^

?.

O t~-CVi t^

8

O t--CVI H O
O 00 H t~-

H CO

0)

V

bO

5

^

a

9)

tS

0

«>

u

+>

V

•a

(U

>

18

Color Preference

TABI£ 12.— WHY DO YOU S<»ffiTIMES BUY
A COLOR OTHER THAN YOUR PREFERENCE?

Salmon users vfao sometimes buy a color
other than their preferred color

Reasons

Birmingham

Boston

Detroit

Percent

Percent

Percent

(2)

(3)

(2)

Lower price

61

_

72

Stores don't have \rtiat I want.

take the next best

18

.

2

Looks nicer for salads

5

-

10

Holds together better when

being prepared
Other reasons i/

2

-

10

17

-

15

Don't know

2

-

7

Weighted base

ikh)

(8)

(58)

1/ None of these reasons was given by as many 8is 10 percent of the

respondents.
2/ Totals more than 100 percent as some respondents gave more than

one smswer.
3/ Percentages are omitted because the data are not statisticeilly

significant.

19

Buying Habits

TABLE 13." THE LAST TIME YOU BOUGHT CANNED
SAI240N--DID YOU PLAN TO BUY IT BEFORE YOU WENT
TO THE STORE OR DID YOU DECIDE ON IT AT THE STORE?

T^pe of purchase

Salmon users

Birmingham Boston Detroit

Percent Percent Percent

100

100

100

Planned
Impulse
Don't know

79

21

0

11

0

81

19
0

Weighted base

(370)

(11^3)

(388)

TABLE 14.--WHAT MATE YOU EECIDE TO BUY IT ON IMPULSE?

Reasons

Salmon users who made last
purchase of salmon on impulse
Birmingham Boston Detroit

Percent

Percent

Percent

(2)

(3)

100

Saw It amd Just bought It
Special price, on sale, good buy
To stock pantry
Other reasons ±/
Don't know

59

11*

11

19

5

-

39

56

3

2

0

Weighted base

(76)

(16)

(75)

l/ None of these reasons was given by as many as 10 percent of the

respondents.
2/ Totals more than 100 percent as some respondents gave more than

one euiswer.
3/ Percentages are omitted because the data axe not statistically

significant.

20

Serving Habits

TABI£ 15." WHEN DO YOU SERVE SAIWON?

Tiae of serving

Salmon users

Birmingham

Boston

Detroit

Percent

Percent

Percent

(1)

(1)

(1)

U2

h2

31

79

73

88

9

16

9

10

Ik

6

k

3

k

20

0

3

0

0

(2)

Lunch at hcne

Dinner

Snack

Lunch to take to vork

Picnic

Breakfast

Don't know

Weighted base

(370)

(1U3) (388)

l/ Totals more than 100 x>ercent as some respondents gave more than

one answer.
2/ Less th€m one percent.

TABI£ l6.— WAS SAIWON SERVED IN YOUR HCME WHEN YOU WERE A CHILD?

Response

Salmon users

Birmingham Boston Detroit

Percent Percent Percent

100

100

100

Yes

No

Don't know

Weighted base

90
8
2

87 90

10 10

3 (1)

(370) (11^3) (388)

l/ Less than one percent.

21

Serving Habits

TABLE 17.— WHAT WOULD INEUCE YOU TO USE MORE SAIK0N7

Salmon iisers

Reasons

BlmlnghaiB

Boston

Detroit

Percent

Percent

Percent

(1)

(1)

(1)

36

37

kk

3

19

k

k8

k2

ko

11

10

11

6

1

5

If cheaper. If on sale
Remove black skin, bone
Nothing
Other reasons
Don't know

Weighted base

(370)

ilhS)

(388)

1/ Totals more than 100 percent as sane respondents gave more than
one answer.

TABLE 18.— IF LESS EXPENSIVE SAIMON HAD THE SKIN AND
BONES REMOVED, HOW WOULD IT INFLUENCE YOUR SAD40N USE?

Salmon users

Responses

Birmingham Boston Detroit

Percent Percent Percent

100

100

100

Would eat more salsion

Would eat about same quantity

Don't know

Weighted base

27
72

1

36

62

2

(370) (lif3)

25

73

2

(388)

22

Recipe Sovirces

TABLE 19.— HAVE YOU EVER USED A RECIPE OBTAINED TRCM A SAI140N CAN?

Responses

SaljDon users

Birmingham Boston Detroit

Percent Percent Percent

100

100

100

Yes

No

Don't knov

Weighted base

22

78
(1)

17

83

0

(370) (li^3)

21

79
0

(388)

1/ Less than one percent.

TABLE 20. --HAVE YOU EVER USED A RECIPE OBTAINED FROM AN ADVERTISEMENT?

Responses

Salmon users

Blimlnghan Boston Detroit

Percent Percent Percent

100

100

100

Yes

No

Don't knov

Weighted base

25
1
(370)

3k

66

0

(11^3)

32

66

2

(388)

23

Ordering Salmon In
Public Eating Places

TABLE 21.— HAVE YOU ORDERED SAIMON IN A
PUBLIC EATING PLACE IN THE LAST TWO MONTHS?

Salmon users

Responses

BlrBLlngham Boston Detroit

Percent Percent Percent

ICX)

100

100

Yes

No

Don't luiov

Weighted base

5

95

0

5

95

0

2

97

1

(370) (1U3) (388)

TABI£ 22.--BESIEES YOURSELF, HAS ANYONE EATING WITH YOU
OREERED SAI140N IN A PUBLIC EATING PLACE IN THE LAST TWO MONTHS?

Salmon users

Responses

Birmingham Boston Detroit

Percent Percent Percent

100

100

100

Yes

No

Don't knov

Weighted base

6
92

2

3
3

(370) (ll^3)

3

9^^
3

(388)

2k

Reasons for Not Using
or Seldom Using Salmon

TABLE 23.— IS THERE ANY SPECIAL REASON
Wffif YOU DO NOT USE CANNED SAIMON?

Reasons

Salmon non-users who have not
served salmon In past 12 months

Birmingham

Boston

Detroit

Percent

Percent

Percent

(1)

(1)

(1)

6k

80

68

U

11

2k

18

10

8

23

12

16

0

(2)

0

Unattractive

Price too high

Health or diet reasons

Other reasons

Don't know

Weighted base

(88)

(238)

(235)

1/ Totals more than 100 percent as some respondents gave more than

one cuiswer.
2/ Less than one percent.

TABLE 2l^.— DID YOU EVER USE SAIMON IN THE PAST?

Responses

Salmon non-users who have not
served salmon in past 12 months
Birmingham Boston Detroit

Percent Percent Percent

100

100

100

Yes

No

Don't know

Weighted base

52

3

(88)

37

61

2

55
kk

1

(238) (235)

25

Reasons for Wot Using
or Seldom Using Salmon

TABIE 25.--WHr MD YOU STOP USING SAI/C0N7

Salmon non-users vho

have not

served salmon in past

12 months

Reasons

but vho used

salmon previously

Bimiinghani

Boston

Detroit

Percent

Percent

Percent

(1)

(1)

(1)

Unattractive

22

31

28

Reduction in size of family

20

13

Ik

Price too high

11

20

25

Health or diet reasons

21

15

11

Other

29

27

17

Don't knov

2

1

5

Weighted base

(W)

(89)

(130)

1/ Totals more than 100 percent as seme respondents gave more than
one emsver.

TABLE 26. --WET DO YOU SERVE SAI>«)N SO SELDOM?

Reasons

Salmon non-users vho have
seirved salmon in past 12 months

Birmingham

Boston

Detroit

Percent

Percent

Percent

(1)

(1)

(1)

Unattractive

k6

55

h5

Price too high

19

12

29

Health or diet

reasons

5

6

5

Difficult to prepare

or use

k

13

9

Other

35

32

22

Don't know

(2)

1

1

Weighted base

(211)

(190)

(293)

1/ Totals more than 100 percent as seme respondents gave more than

one ansver.
2/ Less than one percent. 26

Reasons for Not Using
or Seldom Using Salmon

TABIZ 27.— DID YOU USE SAIMON MORE OFTEN IN THE PAST?

Responses

Salmon non-users vho have
served salmon In past 12 months
Blrmi ngham Boston Detroit

Percent

Percent

Percent

Yes

No

Don't knov

We i^ ted base

100

57
k2

1

(211)

100
26

72

2

(190)

100

51
(1)

(293)

1/ Less than one percent,

TABI£ 28.— WHY HAVE YOU REDUCED THE NUMBER OP TIMES YOU SERVED IT?

Reasons

Salmon non
seized salmon
and used more
Birmingham

-users \^o have
in past 12 months
salmon previously
Boston Detroit

Percent ]

Percent

Percent

(1)

(1)

(1)

Price too high

Used it when entire family

was living together
Health or diet reasons
Difficult to prepare or use
Unattractive
Other reasons
Don't know

20

25
8
6
3

33
9

21*

20
20
0
12
10
16

31

24
7
7
9

21

5

Weighted base

(120)

(50)

(iMv)

1/ Totals more than 100 percent as some respondents gave more than
one answer. 27

Reasons for Not Using
or Seldan Using Salmon

TABI£ 29.— DOES ANYOHE LIVING IN THE HOUSE LIKE SALMON?

Responses Salmon non-users

Birmingham Boston Detroit

Percent Percent Percent

100 100 100

Yes 83 38 Ik

No 12 11 2k

Don't knov 5 51 2

Weighted base (299) (^28) (528)

bO

O

C

m

•H

fa

•H

a

t

9

Q>

ei

>

-a

<

c

nJ

CO

•H W 0

a; s

t~-pno Q
cnvo o

o qp CM o u\

8^vo o

8^-=t CVJ 00
HOO PO

H CVl

CVJ t^

0O',C VO

gHOO H On
covS <b

s

0)

5

■p

•tJ

• "fl

5

^

:S;§a

•H

^

^

■p

^

P

4)

■'— s

^ coirs o\H

VO

^1

O

H

ir\ H iTN

r--

■P

^<

CO

fi

•s

ONOO H CT\<M CT\
^ CVJ IfN Q

d ca >

a o ti o

« -H 4) a

fl o Ax

•H -H aJ

N o >• Pi+>

tf ^ V n -

bOTJ rH :» fl

•a

+>
fl

4)
O

^

29

characteristics

TABIZ 32.— SEIBCTED SOCIO-ECOHCMIC
CHARACTERISTICS 07 HOUSEHOLDS, H(»!EMAKERS

All respondents

Race

Blzmlngham

Boston

Detroit

Percent

Percent

Percent

White
Hegro
Other

6k

36

0

98
2
0

81

19
0

Religion

Protestant
Catholic
Jewish
Other

9k
6
0
0

33

58

8

1

63

3h

2

1

Inccme

Under $2,999
$3,000 to $3,999
$1^,000 to $»*,999
$5,000 to $6,999
$7,000 or more
Unclassified

Weighted base

31
16
16

18

15
k
(669)

12
15
35
20

15
3
(572)

19
13

20
26

17

(916)

Both parents native bom

les

No

Unclassified

Weighted base

96
3

(668)

58
k2
0
ikQ3)

71
28

(764)

Outside employment of homemaker

33
6k

(669)

26
72
2
(572)

Yes

No
Unclassified

Weighted base

29
70
1
(916)

Coanpleted education of homemaker

Less than 8th grade
8th through 12th grade
College
Unclassified

Weighted base

2k

62

13
(669)

10
73
16

(572)

2k
62

Ik

0
(916)

3P

APPENDIX

SURVEY METHODS

Que»tlonnalra

The dfiveloiment phase of the study
consisted of 57 depth interviews conducted
by specialists in this type of interviewing.
Respondents were chosen for these inter-
views in a non- systematic, but also non-
random method. These interviews consisted
of informal and casual discussions covering
aspects of household consumers' preferences
for canned fish. The respondent was al-
lowed to take whatever direction she wanted
to in these discussions, following her own
natural inclinations. No attempt was made
to limit or restrict the discussion to
predetermined sa*eas of interest. Only when
the respondent had exhausted some topic did
the interviewer attempt to give some fur-
ther direction to the interviews by asking
a very genereLl and open "why" or "how"
question.

In addition, a number of specific
techniques were used in these initial inter-
views as further aids in eliciting consumer
attitudes and motivations. Such techniques
as word association, sentence completion,
response projection, role taking, and
cartoon tests were used.

After the first few of these 57 inter-
views were completed, discussions were held
by the staff and the interviewers. Sug-
gestions were made regarding procedural
changes in order to increase the prospects
for more complete emd detailed infonnation.

Using these 57 preliminary inteirviews
as a basis, a list of associations was
developed showing all of the releveint areas
to be explored in the full scale study.
This "item list ' formed the basis for de-
velopment of the "guided association"
portion of the questionnaire.

Several drafts of the pre-test ques-
tionnaire were then developed, in consul-
tation with staff members of the U. S. Fish
and Wildlife Service, with each draft re-
ceiving limited field tests by a specialist
in interviewing techniques. An improved
draft of the questionnaire was also for-
warded to members of the fish canning
industry for their ccnmients and suggestions.

A full scale pre-test of the ques-
tionnaire was carried out in the three
urbanized areas selected for the full
scale survey, Boston, Massachusetts, Blr-
mlDgham, Alabama and Detroit, Michlgein. A
total of 6l pre-test interviews were com-
pleted. These were distributed approxi-
mately equally among the three urbanized
areas. A coniplete review of all questions
included in the pre-test was carried out
with differences in local interpretation
noted especially. Based on this review
final revisions in the questlonnsdre were
made and specific instructions to the in-
terviewers prepared. A copy of the ques-
tionnaire is included in this Appendix.

Sample Design

The sample design for this study was
constructed with two basic requirements in
mind. First, the sampling techniques em-
ployed must be consistent with the demands
of soiind research methodology; they must be
techniques by irtiich valid inferences may be
drawn from the sample for the population
group under investigation. The only known
way to meet this requirement is through
probability sampling. With probability
samples, the chance of observing a given
individual or element of the population of
interest is known. It permits the re-
seeurcher to not only control the sampling
areas, but also to measxire them. It is
this property, the measurability of area,
which lends validity to the conclusions
drawn from probability samples.

Second, the sample design must be
economically and statistically efficient;
that is, it should, for the budget allotted
and resources available, provide the most
accurate estimates of the characteristics
studied. The estimates derived from the
sample must be of sufficient accuracy to
be used with confidence. Selection of the
most efficient design implies knowledge of
the sources of variation effecting a set
of sample observations or measurements.
The problem of sample design is to make
that Judicious selection among the many
techniques available for controlling these
sources of variation, and hence the
event\uil sampling area, irtilch will achieve
€ua appropriate balance between adminis-
trative efficiency and statistical

31

efficiency. The specific techniques
einployed in the saatple designs constructed
for this study include:

1. Grouping the eligible population
into small clusters or sampling
units ccanprising an efficient
interviewer daily work load.

2. Grouping the sampling units
into city and suburban zones,
in each of the three urbanized
areas surveyed, to provide
approximately proportionate
representation.

3. A further grouping of the
sampling units within each
zone into geographic or area
strata, with an equal number
of sampling units in each
stratum, to ensure adequate
distribution of the sample to
all segments of the popvilation
of interest.

k. Using equal probabilities for
the selecting of sampling \inits
within strata and thereby con-
siderably simplifying the formu-
las necessary for valid compu-
tation of the estimates and of
their standard errors.

A strict probability sample implies
the application of completely objective
methods for the selection of respondents.
In the absence of a list of households or
persons eligible for intejrview, the re-
quired objectivity is met through the use
of area probability sampling techniques.
To be satisfied with simple sjrea sampling
techniques is not enough, however. Inge-
nuity in the use of available resources
and facilities can considerably increase
the efficiency of one area probability
sample over another.

United States Census Population and
Housing data, both published and unpub-
lished, are our major resource in the
design of efficient probability samples.
Unpublished data for small areas, such as
enumeration districts vised in collecting
census data, may be purchased on special
order from the Bureau of the Census. In
open country areas maps Indicating the
location of dwelling units are available

32

from State Highway Ccnmlssions. "Hiis
supplementary information may be used for
a veuriety of purposes in the design of a
sample including stratification, assigning
selection probabilities, or for the con-
struction of approximately equal-sized
sampling units. The sample design outlined
below makes use of 1950 census data to
establish the areti strata and for the
assignment of the sampling units within
these strata. Although these data were not
used for the direct assignment of selection
probabilities, the sampling plan adopted is
such that the chance for emy segnent of the
aureas surveyed, to be represented in the
sample, was approximately proportionate to
the nxnnber of occupied dwelling units con-
tained within the segment whether it was
an enumeration district, census tract,
township, urban place, city block, or
portion of an enumeration district, etc.

A sample representative of all house-
holds In the urbanized areas of Birmingham,
Alabama; Boston, Massachusetts; Detroit,
Michigan was selected for this study. In
addition, a representative sample of all
non-irtilte households located in the rural
portion of Orangeburg County, South
Carolina was chosen. Bureau of the Census
definitions of households, dwelling units,
urbanized area, rural territory etc. were
employed. Tiie sample designs for the
three urbanized areas will be described
first. These designs were stratified one-
stage sample designs, constructed in
accordance with the principles outlined
above. Careful control in aLll steps of
the sample selection made it possible to
know exactly the chance every household
cluster or sampling unit had of falling
into the sample.

The first step in the sample design
consisted of listing and ordering geo-
graphically the census tracts in the
central city portions of each of the three
urbanized areas. In Detroit, those census
tracts with 10 percent or more of the
dwelling units occupied by non-white house-
holds in 1950 were listed and ordered
separately. Similarly, ordered lists of
the 1950 Census Enumeration Districts were
prepared for those portions of the three
urbanized areas which fall outside the
central cities. Geographic or area strata
were then constructed within the central
city zones and the suburban zones for each

of the urbanized areas using the ordered
lists and 1950 census data on the number of
occupied dwelling units or households found
in each census tract, block or enumeration
district. These strata, seventy in number
for each urbanized area, vere constructed
to contain approximately the same number
of households In each.

Each of the seventy strata vas then
divided into a number of small area seg-
ments having boundaries vhich could easily
be identified in the field by the inter-
viewers. Each such area segment contained
one or more clusters of households or sam-
pling units. The number of sampling vmits
or interviewer work loads assigned to each
area segment was based on data available on
the number of occupied dwelling units lo-
cated within these segnent boundaries.
These data were obtained from a variety of
sotorces including 1950 block statistics,
1950 enumeration district statistics, state
highway maps, etc.

Tlie geographic strata In each city
were all constructed to contain the same
number of sampling units with the exception
of Detroit. In the central city portion of
Detroit, the area strata for the tracts in
the white zone (that is, the tracts with at
least 90 percent of their 1950 dwelling
units occupied by white families) were con-
structed to contain twice as many sampling
units as the remaining area strata estab-
lished for the Detroit urbanized «u:ea
sample. Initially, two sampling units were
selected with equal probability and without
replacement from each of the geographic
strata, yielding a sample total of ll»0
sanqpling units for each urbanized area.

llie sample selection was accomplished
by choosing two random nxmibers for each
stratum between one emd the total number of
sampling units in the stratum. Thus, the
sampling rate was the same for all geo-
graphic strata within a city with the ex-
ception of those comprising the irtilte zone
in Detroit referred to above. Since these
strata contained twice as many sampling
units as the remaining geographic strata
in Detroit they were sampled at one-half
the rate of the remaining strata in that
urbanized area. The disproportionate sam-
pling in Detroit was deemed necessary to
yield sufficient Interviews with non-white
families for separate tabulation.

The number of strata and sampling
units for the central cities and the re-
maining portions of the three xirbanized
areas are shown in the following table:

Appendix Table 1

NUMBER OF STRATA AND SAMPLING UNITS OF

URBANIZED AREAS INCLUDED IN THE

MOTIVATION SURVEY

Sampling

Number

units

Area

of

per

strata

strat\m

Boston Urbemlzed Area

Boston city

25.0

iMk

Outside city

45.0

1,454

Birmingham Urbanized Area

Birmingham city

52.0

298

Outside city

18.0

298

Detroit Urbsuiized Area

Detroit city, white zone

'. 25.5

2,560

Detroit city, non-\rtiite

15.5

1,280

Outside city

29.0

1,280

The decision to Include a sample of
non-white households in Orangeburg, South
Carolina was made after the sample for the
three principal urbanized areas was de-
signed and selected. The expected sample
size in each of the three urbanized areas
was then reduced from 8^ households to
725 households in order to shift a portion
of the field budget to the survey to be
conducted in Orangeburg Covinty. Rather
thsm design and select a new sample in
each of the three urbeuiized areas, twenty
sampling units in Birmingham, thirteen in
Boston, and twenty-eight in Detroit were
discarded at random with a condition that
no more than one sampling unit woxild be
discarded from any one stratimi.

Strict field procedures were employed
to determine the eligible households
associated with the selected sampling units
in em unbiased manner. The interviewers
were required to list the occupied dwelling
units in each area segment containing a
selected sampling unit in advsmce of the
interviewing. The listings showed addresses
eind other necessary identification for all
dwelling units located within the botmdaries
of each Eu:ea segment. The enumerators were
provided with maps showing these boundaries,
as well as the steurting point and direction

33

to take throiigh the segment for listing
purposes. These lists were then returned
to the Philadelphia office of the A. J.
Wood Research Corporation where they were
checked. Next, the dwelling \inits on each
list which were associated with the se-
lected sampling units were marked for inter-
viewing. For example, if a given area seg-
ment was assigned three sampling xinlts and
the random selection had designated the
second sampling unit, the list was first
divided into three equal parts and then the
dwelling units listed in the second of the
three parts were marked for interview.
The few sampling units in each urbanized
area which contained more than 12 house-
holds selected for interview were sub-
sampled. The lists were then returned to
the interviewers for interviewing.

The interviewers were instructed to
interview the sample (marked) households
on the list and any other household (not
shown on the list) found between a sample
household and the next one listed. TbMS
households irtiich might have been emitted
in the pre-listing were included; and
changes occvirrlng after the pre-listing
were accounted for. Interviews in the
sample households were conducted with the
person mainly responsible for planning the
meals. Where the person designated for
interview was not at heme on the first
call, succeeding calls up to a total of
three were made on different days or
evenings (in seme instances more than
three calls were made ) .

Tbe sample design for the Orangeburg
County, South Carolina, sample was similar
in many respects. After preparing an
ordered list of the enumeration districts
faLLling in the rural portion of the county,
sampling units were assigned to the enu-
meration districts according to the number
of dwelling units occupied in 1950 by non-
white household* contained in each. These
sampling units were then grouped into geo-
graphic strata, 21 in total, with each
stratum contsuining 55 sampling units. Two
sampling units were selected at lemdom
without replacement from each stratum,
yielding a total of 42 sampling units for
the sample. Next, maps of each of the area
segments containing a selected sampling
unit were prepared and the interviewers
listed all dwelling xuiits falling within
the area segment, classifying these

3l^

dwelling units according to whether they
were occupied by white households or non-
white households or were vacant. The
location of each dwelling unit was marked
on the segment map and numbered; this same
number was used on the listing sheet.

Field Work

Training sessions with the super-
visors and interviewers were conducted in
each of the survey areas by members of the
Philadelphia office staff of the A. J.
Wood Research Corporation. Initial field
work was checked for quality and under-
stemdlng of the instructions.

In addition to the check of the
initial interviews, the area supervisors
were required to conduct a preliminary
edit of all work turned in and to check
10 percent of each interviewer's work by
telephone. A further verification check
on the field staff was carried out by the
home office by means of a check card mail-
ing to 33 percent of the respondents in
each city.

A total of 2,385 households were
designated for interview in this survey;
706 in Birmingham, 7^*3 in Boston, 716 in
Detroit and 220 in Oreuigeburg. Interviews
were completed in 1,9*^7 of tiie sample
households. The reasons for the non-inter-
views are tabulated in Appendix Table 2.

Data Processing Procedures

All questionnaires were edited upon
receipt in the Philadelphia office and
those which were incomplete or contained
questionable responses were returned to
the field supervisors for re-interview.
The coding department then prepared tabu-
lations of the open-end questions from a
sample of the completed Interviews from
each survey area. Codes for these ques-
tions were established and coding instruc-
tions prepared and reproduced.

The questionnaire and coding proce-
dures were explained and reviewed with
the coders. Tbe open-end questions were
reserved for coding by the most experi-
enced coders only. Answers to open-end
questions ^Ich were not readily

classified Into specific code categories
were held aside for review by the coding
supervisor and project director. Specific
categories for the latter cases were
established when necessary.

The work of all coders was checked by
the coding supervisor until em acceptable
level of coding consistency was achieved
both between and within coders. Tliere-
after a 10 percent check for the purpose
of maintaining this consistency level was
carried out.

The punch cards were then prepsured
smd weighted as follows. In Detroit, the
Interviews completed in sampling xmits
selected frcm the white zone were dupli-
cated once since these interviewer assign-
ments had one -half the probability of being
Included in the sample as did the remaining
sampling units chosen for this survey in
that city. In addition the punch cards for
interviews completed in assignments which
had been subsampled were weighted according
to the subsampling rates. No atteii5)t was
made to substitute or weight for households
designated for the sample but not inter-
viewed.

sample estimate to the result which would
be obtained from a complete census of the
population sampled, using the same ques-
tionnaire, interviews and interviewing
procedures .

Practically all of the estimates
developed from the data collected in this
study are simple percentages of the re-
spondents having a pturticular opinion or
characteristic. In technical terminology,
these percentages are actually combined
strata ratio estimates, since the sample
design employed extensive geographic
stratification and. cluster sampling, in
which the number of respondents in each
cluster was subject to random sampling
vsuriation. "Rius, sanQjling errors were
computed using the formula for the
variance of a ratio estimate.

This formula contains variance meas-
ures for the cluster average of both the
numerator and denominator of the computed
proportion or percentage estimate, as well
as a cov£u:iance measure for these two
averaiges. These measures were computed
from the average variance between clusters
within strata.

The punch cards then received a
thorough error «uid consistency check on the
IBM Electronic Statistical machine. Where
necessary the punch cards were corrected
by reference to the specific questionnaires
corresponding to the cards in question.

Sampling Errors

The sampling error for a parti cvilar
estimate serves as a guide to the confi-
dence with \rtiich this estimate can be used.
It Is a measure of the closeness of the

The chances are approximately 2 to 1
that the error, due to sampling, in a
parti culJtr estimate, will not exceed one
standard error; the chances are 19 to 1
eigainst a deviation as large as two stand-
ard errors from the result which would be
obtained with a coniplete census using the
same procedures.

Estimates of the standard errors for
several items Included among the guided
association questions are shown in
Appendix Table 3.

35

^

+>

>.

c

■P 03

0)

o

a c

o

o

3 -H

;<

r-l

O H

V

o o

(U

u

to cd

u o

3

,Q ^

u

tt> -P

V

(O 03

,o

CM

^4

s

O

■p

(U

Q

o

Q

u

r-i

9)

+>

Ph

•H

O

M

+>

+>
09

ON

o

Ss

o]

•9 u

^

03 "d

H O

--I

H 13 >

O Vl

O

O ^ 0)

Xi

s:

-d

XI -H

0) tf ^
« 0) >

0)
(0

^

0) -d t»
to 0) ^

:3 +j Qj

3

0)

3 +J (U

o aJ -H

o

•H

O oj +J

^ sr;

^

t

^ c a

H -H 0)

H

(1)

r-H -H

05 w +i

^

-P

efl to -P
■P (U o

-P OJ c

c

^

•H

gTJ C

36

r— CM CO I

ITNVD CM H

CJnOD CO CO

cr\^ CO H

(0

>

0)

^1

■H

o

&

0)

to

•p

c

a

o

•H

m

1

(d

c

(U

o

(X

c

^

>1

bO

Cfl O to Sh <u

-P CO <^ ^ -P

O -— ^ <U -P O

S p: O fe

c c

0) a)

•o -p

B Q)

a <"

to -P

d) o

Jh C

0) v

r-i U

^ fl)

■H >

■H CO

H .H

OJ 0]

4f

a> Q] to

3 --(

rH hO O
OCX!
C 1-t (I)

•H "O to

>, V o

^^ o j3
o o
(50 ;3 0)

<U to !h

05

O O -P

to -P CO to

•H -H (U to

Hi CMV>I

Appendix Table 3
SAMPLING ERRORS

Question

Item

Percent
who agree

A-1

Served canned salmon in
last 12 months :

Birmingnam

86.8

Boston

58.2

Detroit

7I1.3

1

Salmon has a good flavor:

Birmingham

90.1

Boston

70.9

Detroit

82. U

6

Salmon is undesirably oily:

Birmingham

12. U

Boston

li.U

Detroit

12.1

8

Salmon is expensive:

Binajjigham
Boston

hS.o
62. J4

Detroit

63.5

18

Salmon is often eaten by-
sick people:

Birmingham

20.7

Boston

20.2

Detroit-.

26.3

Estimated standard

error in percentage

points

1.7
2.2
1.9

1.2
2.1

1.8

1.5
1.1
1.3

2.9
2.9
2.1

1.9
2.0
2.2

37

38

stratum No.

City

3,1* Sogment No.

QIHSTIONNAIRE
5 Unit No. 6

7

Bureau of the Budget

No. 1*2-5901

Auth. Expires June 30, 1959

r ITiTERVIEW THAT PEBSOH MAINLY RESPONSIBLE FOR PLAWHIMG THE MEALS SERVED IN TKK HOUSEHOLD ]
RECORD OF CALL:

Date . Interview Not at Home Refusal

1st Call

2nd Call

3rd Call

A, J. WOOD RESEARCH CORPORATION

PART A - GUIDED ASSOCIATION QUESTIONS

CANNED FISH STUDY

Time Interview Started:

A.M.

P.M.

Introduce yourself as being from the A. J. Wood national research corporation doing a study for
the U. S. Government. Then say, "I am going to make several statements about three types of
canned fish. After I make the statement will you tell me how you feel about it, If you agree or
disagree!' (interviewer will grade Intensity of feeling by respondent's statement, attitude, tone,
etc.)

(BEAD EACH STATHfflNT
INSERTING EACH VARHfTY
OF CANNED FISH)

PART A

Strongly
agree

Agree

Disagree

strongly
disagree

Don't Imow or
Indifferent

1. has a good

Sardine

9-1

-2

-3

-i*

flavor.

Tuna

-5

-6

-7

-8

Salmon

-9

-0

-X

-Y

2. has an unpleasant

Tuna

10-1

-2

-3

-k

smell.

sardine

-5-

-6

-7

-8

Salmon

-9

-0

-X

-Y

3 . leaves a bad odor

Salmon

11-1

-2

-3

-k

in the refrigerator.

Tuna

-5

-6

-7

-8

Sardine

-9

-0

-X

-Y

•» . has a pleasant

Tuna

12-1

-2

-3

-1*

aftertaste, that is after
it has been eaten.

Sardine

-5

-6

-7

-8

Salmon

-9

-0

-X

-Y

5. can size is

Sardine

13-1

-2

-3

-k

about right for my
household.

Tiuia

-5

-6

-7

-8

Salmon

-9

-0

-X

-Y

6. l8 undesirably

Tuna

11* -1

-2

-3

-k

oily.

Salmon

-5

-6

-7

-8

Sardine

-9

-0

-X

-Y

7. is a food of

Salmon

15-1

-2

-3

-k

high quality.

Tuna

-5

-6

-7

-8

Sardine

-9

-0

-X

J[

39

(READ EACH STATEMENT
INSERTING EACH VARIETY
OF CANNED FISH)

Strongly
agree

Agree

Disagree

strongly
disagree

Don't knov or
Indifferent

8. Is expensive, com-

Tuna

16-1

-2

-3

-k

pared to other canned fish.

Salmon

-5

-6

-7

-8

Setrdlne

-9

-0

-X

-Y

9. has a nice ap-

Salmon

17-1

-2

-3

-1*

pearance when you open
the can.

Tuna

-5

-6

-7

-8

Sardine

-9

-0

-X

2l

Tell me what you think Immediately when I

10. What beverages go best with

11. What beverages go best with

12. What beverages go best with

ask the following questions.

Fruit
Soft Juice
Coffee Tea Milk Beer Drink or Punch Other

(READ EACH STATEMENT
INSERTING EACH VARIBrY
OF CANNED FISH)

Strongly
agree

Agree

Disagree

strongly
disagree

Don't know or
Indifferent

13 . does not have

Sardine

21-1

-2

-3

-1*

many uses .

Tuna

-5

-6

-7

-8

Salmon

-9

-0

-X

jOf

14. Is mainly eaten

Tuna

22-1

-2

-3

-k

by manual laborers .

Sardine

-5

-6

-7

-8

Salmon

-9

-0

-X

-Y

15. Is used by

Salmon

23-1

-2

-3

-1*

people who are in-
experienced cooks.

Tuna

-5

-6

-7

-8

Sardine

-9

-0

-X

-Y

16. is hard to

Tuna

2U-1

-2

-3

-U

make look good to eat.

Sardine

-5

-6

-7

-8

Salmon

-9

-0

-X

-y

17. is used a great

Salmon

25-1

-2

-3

-i*

deal by Negroes .

Tuna

-5

-6

-7

-8

Sardine

-9

-0

-X

-Y

18. l8 often eaten

Tuna

26-1

-2

-3

-J*

by sick people.

Sardine

-5

-6

-7

-8

Salmon

-9

-0

-X

^

ito

A-3

(READ EACH STATEMENT
INSERTING EACH VAFrBTY
OF CANNED FISH)

strongly
agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly
disagree

Don't know or
Indifferent

19. Is usually

Salmon

27-1

-2

-3

-1*

eaten only by
children.

Tuna

-5

-6

-7

-9

Sardine

-9

-0

-X

-Y

20. Is not eaten

Sardine

28-1

-2

-3

-1*

by people trying to lose
weight .

Tuna

-5

-6

-7

-8

Salijion

-9

-0

-X

-Y

21. Is a convenient

Salmon

29-1

-2

-3

-h

food for a busy housewife.

Tuna

-5

-6

-7

-8

Sardine

-9

-0

-X

-Y

22. Is only good

Tuna

30-1

-2

-3

-k

If It Is a well-known
brand .

Sardine

-5

-6

-7

-8

Salmon

-9

-0

-X

-Y

23 . Is too trouble-

Sardine

31-1

-2

-3

-1*

some to prepare.

Tuna

-5

-6

-7

-8

Salmon

-9

-0

-X

-Y

2U . Is food for

Sardine

32-1

-2

-3

-1»

poorer people .

Tuna

-5

-6

-7

-8

Salmon

-9

-0

-X

-Y

25. Canned shrimp are equal
In quality to fresh
shrimp.

><^

33-1

-2

-3

-k

26. Canned shrimp are less

costly than fresh shrimp.

X

-5

-6

-7

Z§

kl

C-1
PART C
SALMON SECTION
A-1. During the last 12 months have you served csmned salmon?

Yes-

No--

I IF "NO," SKIP TO NON-USER SECTION |

During the past h weeks, about how often did you serve canned salmon?

1 time 3

2 times -h

3 times -5

1* times -6

5 times or more

(SPECIFY)

ISAIMON USERS ONLY

1. Who In your family eats salmon.

P— fPld not serve -
Don't know

IF NO SALMON SERVED IN LAST 1*
WEHCS, SKIP TO NON-USER SECTION

Entire family?

or only

Husband,

Respondent,

Children under 5,

Children 5 - 10,

Children 11 - 15,

Male children over 15, —
Female children over 15,-
Other adults?

-35-1
- -2

-jb-l

2. Which size can do you buy salmon In.

3. Which do you prefer? | CHECK ONE~|

h . Is this size. . .

5 . Would you prefer another size can?
I IF "YES"~|

5a. About what size? (SPECIFY)

6. Which color of canned salmon do you buy?

6a. Which do you like better... | CHECK ONE |

7. Do you usually buy that color salmon or do
you sometimes buy another color?

I IF RESPONDENT SOMETIMES CHANGES

7a. Why do you buy It rather than your preference?

3 3A oz., --37-1

7 3A oz. (flat), -- -2

l6 oz. (tall)? - -3

16 oz. (1 lb.)-

7 3A oz.

3 3A 02.

About right, --
Too small, ----
or too large? -

Ye8-
NO"

-9

38-

Red

Pink

Other (SPECIFY)

-39-1
- -2

Red, 5

or pink? -6

Other (SPECIFY) _

_U8uaHy buy —
SoDetlmes buy-

-J»0-1
-- -2

U2

When do you serve salmon...

9. Have you ever used a salmon recipe you got from
a salmon can?

10. Have you ever used a salmon recipe you got from
an ad?

11. The last time you bought salmon did you plan to
buy It before you went to the store; or did you
decide on It at the store?

I IF NOT PIAHMSD |

11a. What made you decide to buy lt7_
PROBE - ESPECIALLY PRICK

Lunch at home, Ul-1

Dinner, -2

Snack, -3

Lunch to take to work, -h

Picnic? -5

Other (SPKCIFT)

Tea -9

No 0

Yes -X

No -Y

Planned 42-1

Not planned -2

12. What would Induce you to use more 8almon?_

13. If less expensive salmon had the skin
and bones removed would you . . .

1** . Was salmon served In your home when
you were a child?

15. Have you ordered salmon In a public eating
place In the last two months?

IF TBS

15a. How many times have you ordered salmon
In any form In a public eating place In
the past two months?

15b. Generally speaking, what day of the week did
you order salmon In a public eating place?

IF MORE THAN ONE DAT MKHTIOHKD,
CIRCLg ALL DATS MENTIONED

15c. Generally speaking, at irtiat time did you
order salmon In a public eating place?

IF MORE THAN ONE TIME MENTIONED,
CIRCLE ALL TIMES MENTIONED

16. Besides yourself, has anyone eating with you ordered

salmon In a public eating place In the last two monthaT

I IF

TES"

16a. Who was It?

1*3^

Eat more of It, '♦'♦-I

Bat about the same? -2

Yes -3

Ho -k

Yes 5

Ho -6

1 to 3 times — - — -7

1* to 6 tines -8

7 to 9 times -9

10 to 12 times -0

Over 13 times— -X

Monday 1*5-1

Tuesday— -— -— -2

Wednesday— — -3

Thursday— — -4

Friday 5

Saturday— -6

Sunday---— -7

Morning-— — — -8

Lunch 9

Afternoon — — -0

Dinner — — -X

Evening—— ^

Yes U6-1

Ho -2

Spouse — — -— -3

Child - -4

Friend or other relative— — ^

U3

SAIMON - HOB -USSR SKTION

I ASK OF FKOPLB WHO HAVI NOT SaRVTO SALMON IH IA3T 12 MOUTHS
1. Is there any special reason vhy you don't use salmon?

36-

PROBK

2. Did you ever use salmon In the past?

2a. Hov long ago did you use lt7_

2b. Why did you stop using salmon?

ASK OF PEOPLE WHO SKRVKD SAXMON IN PAST 12 MONTHS, BUT NOT IN FAST U WZSKS"

3 ■ Why do you use salmon so seldom?

38-

39-

•♦ . Did you use salmon more often in the past?

I IF "W"

Ua. Why have you reduced the number of times you serve It?

^. Does anyone living In the house like salmon?

5a. Who Is It?

.[Tes - -ltO-1

No— 2

Tes -41-1

No 2

Spouse — — -3

Male child — -4

Female child -5

Other (SPECIFT)

UU

8.1

PART B

ROTATE (JfJESTIONS
1. 2 ^^

I ASK ALL RESPONDEtTrS |
1. Have you seen or heard any advertising for canned tuna?

I IF "YES" I

la. Have you seen or heard It...

2 . Have you seen or heard amy advertising for
canned salfflon?

I IF "ICES" J

2a. Have you seen or heard It...

3 . Have you seen or heard any advertising
for canned sardines?

3a. Have you seen or heard It...

k . Have you seen or heard advertising for
canned shrlnip?

I IF "YES^

Ua . Have you seen or heard It ; . .

3 . Do you use canned shrlnpt

I IF "YES" I

5a. Do you use the veined or de-velned
variety, or both?

I IF "BOThH <

5aa. Which do you like better...

6. Which kind of canned fish do you like bast.

Tes 77-1

Ho 2

In magazines, -3

On radio, -k

On television, -5

In newsJiaperB? -6

Yes — - -7

Ho -8

In nagazlnes, -9

On radio, -0

On television, -X

In new8pai>er8? ^

Tes 78-1

No -2

In nagazlnes, -3

On reullo, -h

On television, -5

Dx newsjapers? -6

Tes 7

So 8

In nagazlnes, -9

On radio, -0

On television, -X

In newspapers?-- -Y

[tJs 79-1

No — -2

Veined -- -3

De-velned -^

poth 5

Velnedy 6

or de-velned? -7

Tuna, -8

Salmon, -9

Sardines, — — — — -0

ShrlJip? ^

U5

CLASSIFICATION DATA

MiffirrAL STATUS:

Married

Single

Widowed, divorced, otc-

-70-1

- -2

- li

^. What was the last grade you completed In
school?

Less than 8th 76-I

8th through 12th 2

3

la. How many people eat dinner at home
with you'.' {CIRCLE ONE)

College

ASKED ONLY OF COLORED HOUSEHOLDS |

1 2 3 i* 5 6 7
71-1 -2 -3 -J* -5 -6 -7

-9 -0

IF NOT SINGLE. ASK QUESTIONS lb AHD Ic

lb. How many children eat dinner at
home? (CIRCLE ONE)

1 23U56789 10or more
What are their approximate ages?

9 10 or more 6. How long have you lived In this city?

1 year or less

More than 1 to 5 years

More than 5 to 10 years

More than 10 to 15 years

More than 15 years

[if LESS THAN 15 YEARS. ASK QUESTION SeT

6a. Whore did you come from?

I IF MARRIED, ASK QUESTION ld~|

Id . What jj^ your husband ' s j ob ?

Executive, professional, mer-
chant or own business — '

Clerical or sales personnel-

Manual skilled, semi-skilled

or unskilled worker

Retired, unemployed, or studeot--
Other (SPECIFY)

-72-1
- -2

2 . Do you work?

I IF "YES." ASK QUESTION 2a~
2a. What is your Job?

Yes-

No--

-73-1
- -2

Executive, professional, mer-
chant or own business

Clerical or sales personnel

Manual skilled, semi-skilled

or unskilled worker ,

Retired, unemployed, or student

Other (SPECIFY)

1 HAJtP RESPONDENT CARD §k

Would you tell me which letter indicates
the age you are? (CIRCLE ONE)

B

E

71* -1 -2 -3 -U _^
. I HAND RESPONDENT CARD #5"[

k . Would you tell me into which group your
total family Inccme falls? (CIRCIi ONE)

A

75-1

E

i2

Northern state —
Southern state —
Foreign country -

ASK ALL RESPONDENTS

Whore were you born?

Northern state

Southern state

Foreign country (SPECIFY)

-77-1
- -2

IF NATIVE BORN

Wore both of your parents
born in this country?

T08-
NO"

-78-1
- -2

I IF "NO"

In what country(8) were they born?

(SPECIFI)

Father

Mother

Ten years ago did you live in.

open country,

suburbs,

city?

-79-1

- -2

- -3

The religious backgroupd of a family at
times influences eating habits. With what
religion is your family most closely asso-
ciated?

Protestant

Catholic

Jewish

Other (SPECIFY)

AUTOMATIC CLASSIFICATION

White

Negro

Other non -white -

LOCATION OF DWELLING:

City— -
Suburb -

J.

Tela. No.

Add re e s

Interviewer ' a Signature_

City_

State

Data

U6

Time Interview Ccnpletad:
A.M. P.M.

IHT,DUr.,0.C-90- JH'T

MBL WHOI Library - Serials

5 WHSE 00201