Measuring the Moderating Effect of Food Involvement in the Relationship between Food Choice Motives and Fruit Consumption

음식 선택 동기와 과일 소비의 관계에서 음식 관여의 조절효과 평가

  • Kang, Jong-Heon (Department of Cooking Science, Sunchon National University) ;
  • Jeong, Hang-Jin (Department of Cooking Science, Sunchon National University)
  • 강종헌 (순천대학교 조리과학과) ;
  • 정항진 (순천대학교 조리과학과)
  • Published : 2008.08.31

Abstract

The principal objective of this study was to assess the effects of food involvement moderating the relationship between food choice motives, including health concerns, weight control and ethical concern, and fruit consumption. A total of 290 questionnaires were completed. Moderated regression analysis was utilized to assess the relationships among variables. The results of the study showed that the results of data analysis also indicated good model fit. The direct effects of health concerns on fruit consumption were statistically significant in Models 1 and 2. However, the direct effects of ethical concern on fruit consumption were statistically significant in Model 3. As had been expected, the interaction of ethical concerns and food involvement exerted a significant effect on fruit consumption in Model 3. However, the interaction of health concern and food involvement, as well as weight control and food involvement exerted no significant effects on fruit consumption. Moreover, ethical concerns about fruit consumption exerted a significant negative effect at the low level and a positive effect at the high level of food involvement, except in cases in which the level of food involvement was medium. The results of this study revealed that fruit marketers should attach importance to the interaction effect of food involvement in order to better understand the elements of market demand and customer loyalty.

Keywords

Moderating effect;food involvement;fruit consumption;food choice motives;moderated regression analysis

References

  1. Beardsworth A, Keil T. 1992. The vegetarian option: Varieties, conversions, motives, and careers. Sociological Review, 40(2):251-293
  2. Eertmans A, Victoir A, Vansant G, Van den Bergh O. 2005. Food related personality traits, food choice motives and food intake: Mediator and moderator relationships. Food Quality and Preference, 16(8):714-726 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2005.04.007
  3. Furst T, Connors M, Bisogni CA, Sobal J, Falk LW. 1996. Food choice: A conceptual model of the process. Appetite, 26(3):247-265 https://doi.org/10.1006/appe.1996.0019
  4. Whorton J. 1994. Historical development of vegetarianism. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 59(5):1103-1109 https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcn/59.5.1103S
  5. Chen MF. 2007. Consumer attitudes and purchase intentions in relation to organic foods in Taiwan: Moderating effects of food related personality traits. Food Quality and Preference, 18(7):1008-1021 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2007.04.004
  6. Santos MLS, Booth D. 1996. Influences on meat avoidance among British students. Appetite, 27(3):197-205 https://doi.org/10.1006/appe.1996.0046
  7. Andaleeb SS, Conway C. 2006. Customer satisfaction in the restaurant industry. Journal of Services Marketing, 20(1):3-11 https://doi.org/10.1108/08876040610646536
  8. Fessler DMT, Arguello AP, Mekdara JM, Macias R. 2003. Disgust sensitivity and meat consumption: A test of an emotivist account of moral vegetarianism. Appetite, 41(1):312-341
  9. Gaard G. 2002. Vegetarian eco-feminism: A review essay. Frontiers, 23: 117-146
  10. Bedford JL, Barr SI. 2005. Diets and selected lifestyle practices of self defined adult vegetarians from a population-based sample suggest that are more 'health conscious'. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 2(1):4-14 https://doi.org/10.1186/1479-5868-2-4
  11. Baum A, Posluszny DM. 1999. Health psychology: Mapping biobehavioral contributions to health and illness. Annual Review of Psychology, 50(1):137-163 https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.50.1.137
  12. Bell R, Marshall DW. 2003. The construct of food involvement in behavioral research: Scale development and validation. Appetite, 40(3):235-244 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0195-6663(03)00009-6
  13. Zellner DA, Saito S, Gonzalez J. 2007. The effect of stress on men's food selection. Appetite, 49(3):696-699 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2007.06.013
  14. Key T, Appleby PN, Rosell MS. 2006. Health effects of vegetarian and vegan diets. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society, 65(1):35-41
  15. Kim HJ, Houser RF. 1999. Two small surveys, 25 years apart, investigating motivations of dietary choice in 2 groups of vegetarians in the Boston area. Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 99(5):598-601 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0002-8223(99)00147-9
  16. Lindeman M, Sirelius M. 2001. Food choice ideologies: The modern manifestations of normative and humanist views of the world. Appetite, 37(3):175-184 https://doi.org/10.1006/appe.2001.0437
  17. Steptoe A. 1991. The links between stress and illness. Journal of Psychonomic Research, 35(6):633-644 https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3999(91)90113-3
  18. Wilson SM, Weatherall A, Butler C. 2004. A rhetorical approach to discussions about health and vegetarianism. Journal of Health Psychology, 9(4):567-581 https://doi.org/10.1177/1359105304044040
  19. Greeno CG, Wing RR. 1994. Stress-induced eating. Psychological Bulletin, 115(3):444-464 https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.115.3.444
  20. Marshall DW, Bell R. 2004. Relating the food involvement scale to demographic variables, food choice and other constructs. Food Quality and Preference, 15(7/8):971-979
  21. Kenyon PM, Barker ME. 1998. Attitudes towards meat eating in vegetarians and non-vegetarian teenage girls in England. An ethnographic approach. Appetite, 30(2):185-198 https://doi.org/10.1006/appe.1997.0129
  22. Fox N, Ward K. 2007. Health, ethics and environment: A qualitative study of vegetarian motivations. Appetite, 50(2/3):422-429 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2007.09.007
  23. Kalof L, Dietz T, Stern PC, Guagnano GA. 1999. Social psychological and structural influences on vegetarian beliefs. Rural Sociology, 64(3):500-511 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1549-0831.1999.tb00364.x
  24. Lea E, Worsley A. 2001. Influences on meat consumption in Australia. Appetite, 36(2):127-136 https://doi.org/10.1006/appe.2000.0386
  25. Rozin P, Markwith M, Stoess C. 1997. Moralization and becoming a vegetarian: The transformation of preferences into values and the recruitment of disgust. Psychological Science, 8(2):67-73 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.1997.tb00685.x
  26. Hoek AC, Pieternel AL, Stafleu A, de Graaf C. 2004. Foodrelated lifestyle and health of Dutch vegetarians, non-vegetarian consumers of meat substitutes, and meat consumers. Appetite, 42(3):265-272 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2003.12.003
  27. Povey A, Wellens B, Conners M. 2001. Attitudes towards following meat, vegetarian and vegan diets: An examination of the role of ambivalence. Appetite, 37(1):15-26 https://doi.org/10.1006/appe.2001.0406
  28. Steptoe A, Pollard TM, Wardle J. 1995. Development of a measure of the motives underlying the selection of food: The Food Choice Questionnaire. Appetite, 25(3):267-284 https://doi.org/10.1006/appe.1995.0061