{"id":{"repo_id":"vt","oai_identifier":"oai:vtechworks.lib.vt.edu:10919/44868"},"canonical_url":"https://search.dev.ndltd.org/etd/vt/oai:vtechworks.lib.vt.edu:10919/44868","repository":{"repo_id":"vt","name":"Virginia Tech","base_url":"https://vtechworks.lib.vt.edu/oai/request"},"display":{"title":"Consumers' knowledge, practices, and satisfaction with cooking systems' interaction","abstract":"The purpose of this research was to determine consumers’ satisfaction with cooking systems commonly available in the United States. Five types of cooktops (conventional electric coil, gas flame, solid element, and halogen and electric coil under glass ceramic) and six types of cookware (glass ceramic, porcelain enamel-on-aluminum nonstick, stainless steel with an aluminum disk, heavy gauge aluminum, thin gauge aluminum, and heavy gauge aluminum with non-stick finish) formed 30 cooking systems. Fifteen consumers prepared one menu that represented four cooking operations (frying, boiling, thermalization, and waterless) with each of the 30 cooking systems. They also completed a three-part questionnaire to determine their knowledge and practices regarding the interaction between cooktops and cookware at the beginning, to assess their satisfaction with each cooking system, and to test their knowledge and preferences after completing the 30 cooking systems. Statistical analysis included repeated measures ANOVA, T-test, and General Linear Model (GLM). Statistically significant findings include: (1) Knowledge was different before and after completing the 30 cooking systems; (2) There was a relationship between consumers’ knowledge and overall satisfaction; (3) There was a relationship between optimum compatibility and consumers’ satisfaction; (4) There were differences among cookware of different gauges with respect to evenness of heating; (5) The cooking systems required different levels of user interaction; (6) There were differences in consumers’ satisfaction with cookware cleaning and frying due to the interior finish of the cookware. However, there was no significant difference in consumers’ overall satisfaction with the cooking systems.","abstract_html":"The purpose of this research was to determine consumers’ satisfaction with cooking systems commonly available in the United States. Five types of cooktops (conventional electric coil, gas flame, solid element, and halogen and electric coil under glass ceramic) and six types of cookware (glass ceramic, porcelain enamel-on-aluminum nonstick, stainless steel with an aluminum disk, heavy gauge aluminum, thin gauge aluminum, and heavy gauge aluminum with non-stick finish) formed 30 cooking systems. Fifteen consumers prepared one menu that represented four cooking operations (frying, boiling, thermalization, and waterless) with each of the 30 cooking systems. They also completed a three-part questionnaire to determine their knowledge and practices regarding the interaction between cooktops and cookware at the beginning, to assess their satisfaction with each cooking system, and to test their knowledge and preferences after completing the 30 cooking systems. Statistical analysis included repeated measures ANOVA, T-test, and General Linear Model (GLM). Statistically significant findings include: (1) Knowledge was different before and after completing the 30 cooking systems; (2) There was a relationship between consumers’ knowledge and overall satisfaction; (3) There was a relationship between optimum compatibility and consumers’ satisfaction; (4) There were differences among cookware of different gauges with respect to evenness of heating; (5) The cooking systems required different levels of user interaction; (6) There were differences in consumers’ satisfaction with cookware cleaning and frying due to the interior finish of the cookware. However, there was no significant difference in consumers’ overall satisfaction with the cooking systems.","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["DeMerchant, Elizabeth Ann"],"institution":"Virginia Tech","degree_name":"Master of Science","degree_level":"masters","degree_discipline":"Housing, Interior Design, and Resource Management","degree_department":"Housing, Interior Design, and Resource Management","school":null,"contributors":[],"advisors":[],"committee_chairs":["Lovingood, Rebecca P."],"committee_members":["Leech, Irene E.","Johnson, Janet M."],"year":1993,"date_issued":"1993-12-05","date_published":"1993-12-05","updated_at":"2026-07-22T22:19:37Z","subjects":[],"languages":["en"],"rights":["In Copyright"],"rights_urls":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"identifier_entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier.other","label":"Dc Identifier Other","values":["etd-09192009-040448"],"render_values":[{"text":"etd-09192009-040448","href":null,"code":true}]}]},"links":{"outbound_url":"http://hdl.handle.net/10919/44868","outbound_label":"Handle","outbound_source":"dc:identifier.uri"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor.committeechair","label":"Committee Chair","values":["Lovingood, Rebecca P."]},{"key":"dc:contributor.committeemember","label":"Committee Member","values":["Leech, Irene E.","Johnson, Janet M."]},{"key":"dc:contributor.department","label":"Department","values":["Housing, Interior Design, and Resource Management"]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["DeMerchant, Elizabeth Ann"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date.accessioned","label":"Dc Date Accessioned","values":["2014-03-14T21:46:20Z"]},{"key":"dc:date.available","label":"Dc Date Available","values":["2014-03-14T21:46:20Z","2009-09-19"]},{"key":"dc:date.issued","label":"Date","values":["1993-12-05"]},{"key":"dc:publisher","label":"Institution","values":["Virginia Tech"]},{"key":"dc:type","label":"Dc Type","values":["Thesis"]},{"key":"dc:type.dcmitype","label":"Dc Type Dcmitype","values":["Text"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_discipline","label":"Discipline","values":["Housing, Interior Design, and Resource Management"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_level","label":"Degree Level","values":["masters"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_name","label":"Degree Name","values":["Master of Science"]},{"key":"thesis:institution_name","label":"Thesis Institution Name","values":["Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University"]}]},{"id":"language_rights","label":"Language and Rights","entries":[{"key":"dc:language.iso","label":"Language (ISO)","values":["en"]},{"key":"dc:rights","label":"Dc Rights","values":["In Copyright"]},{"key":"dc:rights.uri","label":"Rights URI","values":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier.other","label":"Dc Identifier Other","values":["etd-09192009-040448"]},{"key":"dc:identifier.uri","label":"Identifier URI","values":["http://hdl.handle.net/10919/44868"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["The purpose of this research was to determine consumers’ satisfaction with cooking systems commonly available in the United States. Five types of cooktops (conventional electric coil, gas flame, solid element, and halogen and electric coil under glass ceramic) and six types of cookware (glass ceramic, porcelain enamel-on-aluminum nonstick, stainless steel with an aluminum disk, heavy gauge aluminum, thin gauge aluminum, and heavy gauge aluminum with non-stick finish) formed 30 cooking systems. Fifteen consumers prepared one menu that represented four cooking operations (frying, boiling, thermalization, and waterless) with each of the 30 cooking systems. They also completed a three-part questionnaire to determine their knowledge and practices regarding the interaction between cooktops and cookware at the beginning, to assess their satisfaction with each cooking system, and to test their knowledge and preferences after completing the 30 cooking systems. Statistical analysis included repeated measures ANOVA, T-test, and General Linear Model (GLM). Statistically significant findings include: (1) Knowledge was different before and after completing the 30 cooking systems; (2) There was a relationship between consumers’ knowledge and overall satisfaction; (3) There was a relationship between optimum compatibility and consumers’ satisfaction; (4) There were differences among cookware of different gauges with respect to evenness of heating; (5) The cooking systems required different levels of user interaction; (6) There were differences in consumers’ satisfaction with cookware cleaning and frying due to the interior finish of the cookware. However, there was no significant difference in consumers’ overall satisfaction with the cooking systems."]},{"key":"dc:description.degree","label":"Dc Description Degree","values":["Master of Science"]},{"key":"dc:format.medium","label":"Dc Format Medium","values":["BTD"]},{"key":"dc:format.mimetype","label":"Dc Format Mimetype","values":["application/pdf"]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["Consumers' knowledge, practices, and satisfaction with cooking systems' interaction"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor.committeechair":["Lovingood, Rebecca P."],"dc:contributor.committeemember":["Leech, Irene E.","Johnson, Janet M."],"dc:contributor.department":["Housing, Interior Design, and Resource Management"],"dc:creator":["DeMerchant, Elizabeth Ann"],"dc:date.accessioned":["2014-03-14T21:46:20Z"],"dc:date.available":["2014-03-14T21:46:20Z","2009-09-19"],"dc:date.issued":["1993-12-05"],"dc:description.abstract":["The purpose of this research was to determine consumers’ satisfaction with cooking systems commonly available in the United States. Five types of cooktops (conventional electric coil, gas flame, solid element, and halogen and electric coil under glass ceramic) and six types of cookware (glass ceramic, porcelain enamel-on-aluminum nonstick, stainless steel with an aluminum disk, heavy gauge aluminum, thin gauge aluminum, and heavy gauge aluminum with non-stick finish) formed 30 cooking systems. Fifteen consumers prepared one menu that represented four cooking operations (frying, boiling, thermalization, and waterless) with each of the 30 cooking systems. They also completed a three-part questionnaire to determine their knowledge and practices regarding the interaction between cooktops and cookware at the beginning, to assess their satisfaction with each cooking system, and to test their knowledge and preferences after completing the 30 cooking systems. Statistical analysis included repeated measures ANOVA, T-test, and General Linear Model (GLM). Statistically significant findings include: (1) Knowledge was different before and after completing the 30 cooking systems; (2) There was a relationship between consumers’ knowledge and overall satisfaction; (3) There was a relationship between optimum compatibility and consumers’ satisfaction; (4) There were differences among cookware of different gauges with respect to evenness of heating; (5) The cooking systems required different levels of user interaction; (6) There were differences in consumers’ satisfaction with cookware cleaning and frying due to the interior finish of the cookware. However, there was no significant difference in consumers’ overall satisfaction with the cooking systems."],"dc:description.degree":["Master of Science"],"dc:format.medium":["BTD"],"dc:format.mimetype":["application/pdf"],"dc:identifier.other":["etd-09192009-040448"],"dc:identifier.uri":["http://hdl.handle.net/10919/44868"],"dc:language.iso":["en"],"dc:publisher":["Virginia Tech"],"dc:rights":["In Copyright"],"dc:rights.uri":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"dc:title":["Consumers' knowledge, practices, and satisfaction with cooking systems' interaction"],"dc:type":["Thesis"],"dc:type.dcmitype":["Text"],"thesis:degree_discipline":["Housing, Interior Design, and Resource Management"],"thesis:degree_level":["masters"],"thesis:degree_name":["Master of Science"],"thesis:institution_name":["Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-22T22:19:37Z"}