File Download
  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Why don’t poor men eat fruit? Socioeconomic differences in motivations for fruit consumption

TitleWhy don’t poor men eat fruit? Socioeconomic differences in motivations for fruit consumption
Authors
Issue Date2014
PublisherElsevier. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.elsevier.com/locate/appet
Citation
Appetite, 2014, v. 84. p. 271-279 How to Cite?
AbstractBackground: Those of lower socioeconomic status (SES) tend to have less healthy diets than those of higher SES. This study aimed to assess whether differences in motivations for particular foods might contribute to socioeconomic differences in consumption. Methods: Participants (n = 732) rated their frequency of consumption and explicit liking of fruit, cake and cheese. They reported eating motivations (e.g., health, hunger, price) and related attributes of the investigated foods (healthiness, expected satiety, value for money). Participants were randomly assigned to an implicit liking task (Single Category Implicit Association Task) for one food category. Analyses were conducted separately for different SES measures (income, education, occupational group). Results: Lower SES and male participants reported eating less fruit, but no SES differences were found for cheese or cake. Analyses therefore focused on fruit. In implicit liking analyses, results (for income and education) reflected patterning in consumption, with lower SES and male participants liking fruit less. In explicit liking analyses, no differences were found by SES. Higher SES participants (all indicators) were more likely to report health and weight control and less likely report price as motivators of food choices. For perceptions of fruit, no SES-based differences were found in healthiness whilst significant interactions (but not main effects) were found (for income and education) for expected satiety and value for money. Neither liking nor perceptions of fruit were found to mediate the relationship between SES and frequency of fruit consumption. Conclusions: There is evidence for social patterning in food motivation, but differences are modified by the choice of implicit or explicit measures. Further work should clarify the extent to which these motivations may be contributing to the social and gender patterning in diet.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/218474

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorPechey, R-
dc.contributor.authorMonsivais, P-
dc.contributor.authorNg, YL-
dc.contributor.authorMarteau, TM-
dc.date.accessioned2015-09-18T06:38:45Z-
dc.date.available2015-09-18T06:38:45Z-
dc.date.issued2014-
dc.identifier.citationAppetite, 2014, v. 84. p. 271-279-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/218474-
dc.description.abstractBackground: Those of lower socioeconomic status (SES) tend to have less healthy diets than those of higher SES. This study aimed to assess whether differences in motivations for particular foods might contribute to socioeconomic differences in consumption. Methods: Participants (n = 732) rated their frequency of consumption and explicit liking of fruit, cake and cheese. They reported eating motivations (e.g., health, hunger, price) and related attributes of the investigated foods (healthiness, expected satiety, value for money). Participants were randomly assigned to an implicit liking task (Single Category Implicit Association Task) for one food category. Analyses were conducted separately for different SES measures (income, education, occupational group). Results: Lower SES and male participants reported eating less fruit, but no SES differences were found for cheese or cake. Analyses therefore focused on fruit. In implicit liking analyses, results (for income and education) reflected patterning in consumption, with lower SES and male participants liking fruit less. In explicit liking analyses, no differences were found by SES. Higher SES participants (all indicators) were more likely to report health and weight control and less likely report price as motivators of food choices. For perceptions of fruit, no SES-based differences were found in healthiness whilst significant interactions (but not main effects) were found (for income and education) for expected satiety and value for money. Neither liking nor perceptions of fruit were found to mediate the relationship between SES and frequency of fruit consumption. Conclusions: There is evidence for social patterning in food motivation, but differences are modified by the choice of implicit or explicit measures. Further work should clarify the extent to which these motivations may be contributing to the social and gender patterning in diet.-
dc.languageeng-
dc.publisherElsevier. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.elsevier.com/locate/appet-
dc.relation.ispartofAppetite-
dc.rightsCreative Commons: Attribution 3.0 Hong Kong License-
dc.titleWhy don’t poor men eat fruit? Socioeconomic differences in motivations for fruit consumption-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.identifier.emailNg, YL: yln21@hku.hk-
dc.description.naturepublished_or_final_version-
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.appet.2014.10.022-
dc.identifier.hkuros251015-
dc.identifier.volume84-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats