Quantification of Consumer Attitudes to Health and Hedonic Characteristics of Foods

Roininen, Katariina; Lähteenmäki, Liisa; Tuorila, Hely

doi:10.1006/appe.1999.0232

Cited by 601 publications

(465 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

405

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Moreover, research has shown that political values are in general an important motive in food choices (Chen, 2007;Honkanen, Verplanken, & Olsen;2006). Past studies indicate that perceived healthiness of food and health-related issues generally tend to be an important factor influencing food choice (Roininen, Lähteenmäki, & Tuorila, 1999;Scheibehenne, Miesler, & Todd, 2007;Steptoe, Pollard, & Wardle, 1995). As a growing body of research has linked meat consumption with an increased risk of obesity, heart disease, and cancer (Chao et al, 2005;Sinha, Cross, Graubard, Leitzmann, & Schatzkin, 2009;Wang & Beydoun, 2009), it is not surprising that health concerns are one of the most important motives for changing to a vegetarian diet (Dibb & Fitzpatrick, 2014, Tobler et al, 2011.…”

Section: Individual Differences Between Vegetarians and Meat Eatersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Examining the “Veggie” personality: Results from a representative German sample

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. The decision to publish a submission in SOEPpapers is made by a board of editors chosen by the DIW Berlin to represent the wide range of disciplines covered by SOEP. There is no external referee process and papers are either accepted or rejected without revision. Papers appear in this series as works in progress and may also appear elsewhere. They often represent preliminary studies and are circulated to encourage discussion. Citation of such a paper should account for its provisional character. A revised version may be requested from the author directly. Terms of use: Documents inAny opinions expressed in this series are those of the author(s) and not those of DIW Berlin.Research disseminated by DIW Berlin may include views on public policy issues, but the institute itself takes no institutional policy positions. Author NoteCorrespondence should be addressed to: Tamara M. Pfeiler, Department of Psychology, Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, Binger Str. 14-16, 55099 Mainz, Germany. E-mail:pfeiler@uni-mainz.de. EXAMINING THE VEGGIE PERSONALITY 3 AbstractAn increasing proportion of people choose to follow a vegetarian diet. To date, however, little is known about if and how individual differences in personality relate to following a vegetarian diet.In the two studies presented here, we aimed to (1) estimate the prevalence of self-defined vegetarians in two waves of a German representative sample (N = 4,496 and 5,125, respectively), (2) analyze the effect of socio-demographic variables on dietary behavior, and (3) examine individual differences between vegetarians and meat eaters in personality traits, political attitudes, and health-related variables. In Study 1, a strict definition of vegetarians was used, while in Study 2 the definition was laxer, to include also individuals who only predominantly followed a vegetarian diet. The prevalence of self-defined vegetarians was 2.74% in Study 1, and 5.97% in Study 2. Participants who were female, younger, and more educated were more likely to report following a vegetarian diet in both studies, and vegetarians had higher income as compared to meat eaters in Study 2. We also found differences between vegetarians and meat eaters with regard to personality traits, political attitudes, and health-related variables. Stepwise logistic regression analyses showed a unique effect beyond socio-demographic variables for openness (Studies 1 and 2), conscientiousness (Study 1), trust (Study 2), conservatism (Studies 1 and ...

show abstract

Section: Individual Differences Between Vegetarians and Meat Eatersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Examining the “Veggie” personality: Results from a representative German sample

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Efforts were made to ensure the diversity of the profile of participants based on a number of key demographic characteristics such as age, gender, socio-economic status and household size. In addition, participants' selfreported health consciousness was calculated using a general health interest scale (47) . Fifty participants were recruited, n 30 from the Republic of Ireland (ROI), in Dublin and n 20 from Northern Ireland (NI), in Belfast.…”

Section: Study Participants and Recruitmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Let’s talk about health: shoppers’ discourse regarding health while food shopping

O'Brien

McConnon

Hollywood

et al. 2014

Public Health Nutr.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: The present study aimed to examine the role of health in consumers' food purchasing decisions through investigating the nature of people's discourse regarding health while conducting their food shopping. Design: The study employed the think-aloud technique as part of an accompanied shop. All mentions of health and terms relating to health were identified from the data set. Inductive thematic analysis was conducted to examine how health was talked about in relation to people's food choice decisions. Setting: Supermarkets in Dublin, Republic of Ireland and Belfast, Northern Ireland. Subjects: Participants (n 50) were aged over 18 years and represented the main household shopper. Results: Responsibility for others and the perceived need to illicit strict control to avoid 'unhealthy' food selections played a dominant role in how health was talked about during the accompanied shop. Consequently healthy shopping was viewed as difficult and effort was required to make the healthy choice, with shoppers relating to product-based inferences to support their decisions. Conclusions: This qualitative exploration has provided evidence of a number of factors influencing the consideration of health during consumers' food shopping. These results highlight opportunities for stakeholders such as public health bodies and the food industry to explore further ways to help enable consumers make healthy food choices.

show abstract

“…Some focus on reasons for eating, such as the Motivations to Eat Scale, which assesses four core motives (to enhance pleasure, to cope with negative affect, to be social, and to comply with others' expectations, Jackson et al, 2003) or the Dutch Eating Behavior Questionnaire (Van Strien et al, 1986) including eating in response to negative emotions (emotional eating) and in response to external sensory cues such as the smell and appearance of food (external eating) as two core motivations to eat. Others focus on both reasons for eating and food choice, such as the Health and Taste Attitudes Questionnaire which quantifies the initiation of eating for the pleasure of taste and choice of foods for health reasons (Roininen, Lähteenmäki, & Tuorila, 1999). However, many measures focus on food choices in everyday life, whereby motives for eating and food choices can substantially overlap, as in the case of emotional or sensory reasons for eating behavior.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Specifically, motives were extracted from questionnaires and research on reasons for eating and food choice, whereby questionnaires on eating disorders or directed at children or adolescents were excluded. Motives were extracted from the Food Choice Questionnaire (Steptoe et al, 1995), the Motivations to Eat Scale (Jackson et al, 2003), the Affective and Cognitive Origins of Likings and Dislikes (Letarte, Dube, & Troche, 1997), the Food Choice Motives among Women questionnaire (Lindeman & Stark, 1999), the Ethical Food Choice Motives questionnaire (Lindeman & Väänänen, 2000), the Health and Taste Attitudes Questionnaire (Roininen et al, 1999), the Dutch Eating Behavior Questionnaire (Van Strien et al, 1986;German version: Grunert, 1989), and the Informational Bases of Food Attitudes questionnaire (Aikman, Crites, & Fabrigar, 2006). We also reviewed the Eating Inventory -also called Three Factor Eating Questionnaire, developed by Stunkard and Messick (1985); German Version: Pudel and Westenhöfer (1989), the Eating Motivation Trait Inventory (Horner, 1998), and the Food Motivation Scale (Martins & Pliner, 1998), but these did not provide additional motives.…”

Section: Study 1: Generating Motives For Eating and Food Choicementioning

confidence: 99%

Why we eat what we eat. The Eating Motivation Survey (TEMS)

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tUnderstanding why people select certain food items in everyday life is crucial for the creation of interventions to promote normal eating and to prevent the development of obesity and eating disorders. The Eating Motivation Survey (TEMS) was developed within a frame of three different studies. In Study 1, a total of 331 motives for eating behavior were generated on the basis of different data sources (previous research, nutritionist interviews, and expert discussions). In Study 2, 1250 respondents were provided with a set of motives from Study 1 and the Eating Motivation Survey was finalized. In Study 3, a sample of 1040 participants filled in the Eating Motivation Survey. Confirmatory factor analysis with fifteen factors for food choice yielded a satisfactory model fit for a full (78 items) and brief survey version (45 items) with RMSEA .048 and .037, 90% CI .047-.049 and .035-.039, respectively. Factor structure was generally invariant across random selected groups, gender, and BMI, which indicates a high stability for the Eating Motivation Survey. On the mean level, however, significant differences in motivation for food choice associated with gender, age, and BMI emerged. Implications of the fifteen distinct motivations to choose foods in everyday life are discussed.

show abstract

Quantification of Consumer Attitudes to Health and Hedonic Characteristics of Foods

Cited by 601 publications

References 33 publications

Examining the “Veggie” personality: Results from a representative German sample

Examining the “Veggie” personality: Results from a representative German sample

Let’s talk about health: shoppers’ discourse regarding health while food shopping

Why we eat what we eat. The Eating Motivation Survey (TEMS)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About