M. Kergoat (a, b), A. Giboreau (c), M.A. Beetschen (d), E. Diaze, P. Fayee, H. Nicod (b), T. Meyer (a)

a) Université Paris Ouest Nanterre La Défense, Department of Psychology-EA3984, 200 avenue de la République, 92001 Nanterre Cedex, France

b) ADRIANT Silliker, 18 rue Saint-Amand, 75015 Paris, France

c) Institut Paul Bocuse, Château du Vivier, BP25 – 69131 Ecully Cedex, France

d) Unilever Port Sunlight, Quarry Road East, Bebington Wirral CH63 3JW, United Kingdom

e) PSA Peugeot Citroën, route de Gisy, 78943 Vélizy-Villacoublay Cedex, France

In several studies conducted on textile fabrics liking, affective intensity has been identified as accounting for soft tactile sensory preferences. Consumers scoring high on the Affect Intensity Measure (AIM, Larsen, 1984) took more into account tactile information and exhibited a clear preference for fabrics presenting soft tactile properties. From a functional point of view,  experiencing more intensively emotions compensate for lower baseline of arousal (Larsen, 2008).We postulated that high AI consumers used the tactile information as a supplementary source of stimulation in a relative low stimulation context (as in a typical Consumer Laboratory Test). To test this assumption, we manipulated the arousal context before fabrics evaluation itself. The hypothesis was that in a low arousing context high AI persons would rely more on tactile properties as a source of stimulation and prefer soft fabrics, whereas in a high arousing context, preferences for soft tactile products would dampen or even change.

Two hundred and twenty two students were randomly assigned in one of the arousing condition (low or high). Arousal was manipulated by showing low or highly arousing pictures (IAPS; Lang & al., 2005). Six seat car textiles, known as segmenting the sample in two clusters (soft likers vs. non soft likers), were then rated.

In the low arousal context, as expected, both classic clusters were observed with soft likers scoring significantly higher on the AIM scale. This was not the case in the high arousal context where we observed two different groups of preferences with no difference as a function of the AIM scale. These results highlight the interaction of the arousing context, personality and sensory product attributes in test settings. Underlying processes engaged in a sensory evaluation task are discussed.