Skip to main content

Table 2 The left part of the table shows the significant factors in the mixed models highlighting the significant effects of the fixed variables, the right part shows the post-hoc test (Bonferroni corrected) significance values, the relevant means and the standard deviations, values in bold indicate significant results in the comparisons

From: A taste of Kandinsky: assessing the influence of the artistic visual presentation of food on the dining experience

Question Significant factors Coefficient value t -value P values Means ± standard deviations for each presentation Art versus Regular Art versus Neat Neat versus Regular
Complexity Presentation -.97 -2.83 .0064 Art-inspired (7.5 ± 1.95) t = 2.28 t = 2.51 t = .65
P value < .05 P value < .01 P value = .51
Regular (5.7 ± 1.7)
Neat (5.2 ± 2.5)
Artistic presentation Presentation -.99 -2.61 .01 Art-inspired (7.9 ± 2.3) t = 3.04 t = 2.4 t = -.71
P value < .01 P value < .05 P value = .47
Regular (5.7 ± 2.2)
Neat (6.2 ± 2.12)
Liking Presentation -1.18 -3.36 .0014 Art-inspired (8.0 ± 1.8) t = 5.5 t =5.3 t = .01
P value < .001 P value < .01 P value = .90
Regular (5.6 ± 2.0)
Neat (5.5 ± 2.3)
Willingness to pay Presentation -116.9 -2.30 .02 Art-inspired (425 ± 511) t = 3 t = 3.2 t = 0.3
P value < .01 P value < .01 P value = .74
Regular (208 ± 283)
Neat (214 ± 268)
Tastiness Presentation -.70 -2.12 .03 Art-inspired (7.5 ± 1.8) t = 3.9 t = 4.5 t = .73
P value < .01 P value < .01 P value = .46
Regular (5.8 ± 2)
Neat (5.4 ± 2.2)
Consumption 1.8 2.40 .01 .01 .01 .01 .01
-.74 -2.07 .04 .04