| Literature DB >> 24023681 |
Elise F Talsma1, Alida Melse-Boonstra, Brenda P H de Kok, Gloria N K Mbera, Alice M Mwangi, Inge D Brouwer.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Biofortification of cassava with pro-vitamin A can potentially reduce vitamin A deficiency in low-income countries. However, little is known about consumer acceptance of this deep yellow variety of cassava compared to the commonly available white varieties. We aimed to determine the sensory and cultural acceptability of the consumption of pro-vitamin A rich cassava in order to identify key factors predicting the intention to consume pro-vitamin A rich cassava by families with school-aged children in Eastern Kenya.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2013 PMID: 24023681 PMCID: PMC3758265 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0073433
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Figure 1Correlations of the constructs using the combined health belief and theory of planned behavior models.
(Adjusted model based on Sun et al 2006) *P<0.05, ** P<0.001 (both two tailed) The model: The model is based on the idea that the construct Behavioral intention (intention to feed child with pro-vitamin A rich cassava) is an important predictor for Behavior (feeding the child pro-vitamin A rich cassava) The constructs related to ‘Background and perception’, are ‘Knowledge’ (about pro-vitamin A rich cassava and VAD), Perceived susceptibility' (perception of developing VAD), ‘Perceived severity’ (notion of seriousness of developing VAD), and ‘Health value’ (notion of priority to stay healthy). The constructs related to ‘Beliefs and attitudes’, are ‘Health behavior identity’ (notion that it is good to eat vitamin A pro-vitamin A rich cassava), ‘Perceived barriers’ (perceived obstacles which prevent the consumer from eating pro-vitamin A rich cassava) and ‘Attitude towards behavior’ (positive or negative feeling towards eating pro-vitamin A rich cassava). The external factors consist of the constructs ‘Subjective norms‘ (perceived social pressure to consume pro-vitamin A rich cassava), ‘Control beliefs (perceived ability to consume pro-vitamin A rich cassava), and ‘Cues to action’ (external triggers, which stimulate to consume pro-vitamin A rich cassava).
Internal consistency and median scores of the constructs (n = 140).
| Construct | Number of items | Cronbach α | Median | Range of score | Example statements |
| Knowledge | 5 | 0.61 | 19 | 13–25 | Vitamin A can prevent infections |
| Perceived susceptibility | 2 | 0.69 | 10 | 2–10 | School children are at risk of developing VAD |
| Perceived severity | 6 | 0.80 | 26 | 10–30 | Lack of vitamin A makes my child susceptible to diseases |
| Health value | 2 | 0.56 | 10 | 4–10 | That my child can properly see during dusk or dawn is the most important thing in my life |
| Health behavior Identity | 1 | N/A | 3 | 1–5 | Eating pro-vitamin A rich cassava is good for my child |
| Attitudes towards behavior | 9 | 0.73 | 57 | −13–80 | a) Pro-vitamin a rich cassava is nutritious. b) I find it important to prepare food that is nutritious for my child |
| Perceived barriers – 1 | 4 | 0.96 | 13 | 4–20 | I worry about the yellow color of pro-vitamin A rich cassava |
| Perceived barriers – 2 | 10 | 0.60 | 40 | 16–50 | Cassava is expensive to buy |
| Subjective norms | 5 | 0.66 | 21 | −20–50 | a) My husband determines when to prepare cassava. b) The opinion of my husband on what to prepare is important to me |
| Control beliefs | 3 | 0.72 | 15 | 9–15 | I decide what food to buy for my household |
| Cues to action | 8 | 0.80 | 36 | 11–40 | School children in my household suffering from VAD would make me decide to buy pro-vitamin A rich cassava |
| Behavioral intention | 1 | N/A | 4 | 0–4 | Will you prepare pro-vitamin A rich cassava for your child in the future? |
Range refers to minimum and maximum score for each construct in the study.
Results for the difference test with pro-vitamin A rich and white cassava.
| Difference test | Caretakers (n = 30) | Children (n = 30) |
| Participant variability (y) | 0.17 | 0.00 |
| Appropriate model | Beta-binomial | Binomial |
| Max. no. of correct responses | 180 | 180 |
| No. of correct responses needed for significance | 75 | 71 |
| No. of correct responses observed | 130 | 89 |
| Discrimination µ Test: µ0 = 1/3 | 0.72 | 0.49 |
= significant (α = 0.05) using Tarone's Z statistic.
= significant (α = 0.05).
Results for the preference test with pro-vitamin A rich and white cassava.
| Preference test | Caretakers (n = 30) | Children (n = 30) |
| Appropriate model | Binomial | Binomial |
| Max. no. of responses | 30 | 30 |
| No. of responses needed for significance (α = 0.05) | 21 | 21 |
| No. of responses observed favoring yellow cassava | 22 | 21 |
| Paired preference µ Test: µ0 = 1/2 | 0.73 | 0.70 |
= significant (α = 0.05).
Predictors of ‘Health behavior identity’ (model 1) to consume pro-vitamin A rich cassava among the study population (n = 140).
| Model and related constructs | Standardized β | P | R2 | Adjusted R2 |
| Model 1 (Y = Health behavior identity) | 0.30 | 0.23 | ||
| Knowledge | 0.29 | <0.01 | ||
| Perceived susceptibility | 0.43 | 0.63 | ||
| Perceived severity | −0.01 | 0.96 | ||
| Health value | −0.14 | 0.07 |
All models were adjusted for interviewer, age and education of the caretaker.
Predictors of ‘Behavioral intention’ (model 2) to consume pro-vitamin A rich cassava among the study population (n = 140).
| Model and related constructs | Standardized β | P | R2 | Adjusted R2 |
|
| 0.17 | 0.09 | ||
| Health behavior Identity | 0.18 | 0.07 | ||
| Attitudes towards behavior | 0.16 | 0.15 | ||
| Perceived barriers – 1 | −0.21 | 0.02 | ||
| Perceived barriers – 2 | −0.05 | 0.55 |
All models were adjusted for interviewer, age and education of the caretaker.
Predictors of ‘Behavioral intention’ (model 3) to consume pro-vitamin A rich cassava among the study population (n = 140).
| Model and related constructs | Standardized β | P | R2 | Adjusted R2 |
|
| 0.25 | 0.18 | ||
| Subjective norm | −0.09 | 0.32 | ||
| External control beliefs | 0.18 | 0.02 | ||
| Cues to action | 0.51 | <0.01 |
All models were adjusted for interviewer, age and education of the caretaker.