Consumer Acceptance of Personalized Nutrition

Consumer acceptance of genetic-based personalized nutrition in Hungary

“…In contrast to the findings of Ahlgren et al [ 43 ] and Stewart-Knox et al [ 48 ], in our research, middle-aged people (40–49 years of age) are the least reluctant to use the new technology, while the older age group is more reluctant. In line with our expectations, confirming the findings of Cohen et al [ 55 ] and Szakály et al [ 52 – 54 ] it is those with a higher subjective income, who find nutrigenomics-based personalized nutrition more attractive and are less likely to reject it. In contrast to the results of Roosen et al [ 46 ] and in accordance with the findings of Szakály et al [ 52 – 54 ] the current research revealed that the educational level of Hungarian consumers is related to the rejection or acceptance of the new technology: those with a higher level of education accept it in a higher proportion and reject it the least, and vice versa.…”

“…The findings of our research suggest that in contrast to most previous research, the preference of Hungarian consumers for genetic-based personalized nutrition can be described as mixed. The proportion of respondents who consider the new option attractive and claim they would try it is only slightly lower (23.5%) than the results reported by Szakály et al [ 52 – 54 ] (27%) based on their research conducted in 2014. The proportion of those in whom genetically based personalized nutrition evokes ambivalence (45.9%) has barely increased—by only 1.7 percentage points between 2014 and 2019—while the proportion of rejecters has increased by 1.8 percentage points to 30.6%.…”

“…the extent to which consumers are free to choose whether or not to make their genetic profile available), expected to be mediated by perceived behavioural control. In the final empirical model, framing did not contribute significantly to explaining consumer preference for personalized nutrition, but the authors found the following mediation effects of psychological processes in addition to the mediation effects expressed by the theoretical model: perceived cost-benefit ratio mediated expert agreement, subjective norms also played a mediating role when the consumer was the main beneficiary, ease of use and freedom of choice were also mediated by subjective norms, and finally, perceived cost-benefit considerations also proved to be a mediator of freedom of choice in the final model [ 54 , 61 ].

Fig.

…”

“…As regards demographic factors, women are more likely to undergo nutrigenomic tests [ 47 ] and be interested in nutrigenomics-based personalized nutritional advice [ 48 ]; however, the results are mixed, and depend on age and the existence of health problems. Research studies conducted by Ahlgren et al [ 43 ] and Szakály et al [ 52 – 54 ] have found younger people more willing to have a nutrigenomic test performed and adopt nutrigenomics-based personalized nutrition, while according to Stewart-Knox et al [ 48 ], it is older people who are more willing to use these services; Roosen et al [ 47 ], however, found no connection between age and willingness to undergo nutrigenomic tests. Furthermore, those aware of their various health problems would prefer to buy functional foods that meet their genetic risks [ 47 ] and would take advantage of personalized nutritional advice [ 48 ].…”

“…In terms of income, those with higher income are more receptive to personalized nutrition and would be willing to pay more for such services than those with lower income [ 52 – 55 ]. Finally, the findings of some research studies [ 52 – 54 ] suggest that a higher level of education is accompanied by a more extensive acceptance of nutrigenomics-based personalized nutrition, while other results indicate that education is not related to the willingness to use nutrigenetics and personalized nutrition [ 47 ].…”