BACKGROUND: Healthiness, price, and convenience are typically indicated as important motives for food choices; however, it is largely unknown to what extent older adults from high and low socioeconomic groups differ in these underlying motives. A discrete choice experiment (DCE) is an innovative way to elicit implicit motives for food choices. OBJECTIVE: The aim was to investigate differences in food motives between socioeconomic groups by means of a DCE. DESIGN: A DCE was carried out during a face-to-face interview among older adults as part of the Health and Living Conditions in Eindhoven and surrounding cities (GLOBE) cohort study, The Netherlands. Participants (n = 399; mean age: 63.3 y) were offered a series of choice sets about a usual dinner at home and were asked to choose in each choice set between 2 meals and an opt-out choice, with different combinations of attribute levels. We included 5 meal attributes (taste, healthiness, preparation time, travel time to shops, and price) and 3 or 4 levels for each attribute. Data were analyzed by multinomial logit models. RESULTS: Healthiness, taste, price, and travel time to the grocery store proved to significantly influence older adults' meal decisions; preparation time was not significant. Healthiness was the most important attribute for all of the participants. More highly educated participants rated a healthy and less expensive meal to be more important than did less educated participants. Those with a high income rated a meal that was healthy and very tasteful to be more important than did those with a lower income. CONCLUSIONS: Healthiness, taste, price, and travel time to grocery shops influenced older adults' meal decisions. Higher socioeconomic groups valued health more than did lower socioeconomic groups. DCEs represent a promising method to gain insight into the relative importance of motives for food choices. This trial was registered at www.isrctn.com as ISRCTN60293770.
BACKGROUND: Healthiness, price, and convenience are typically indicated as important motives for food choices; however, it is largely unknown to what extent older adults from high and low socioeconomic groups differ in these underlying motives. A discrete choice experiment (DCE) is an innovative way to elicit implicit motives for food choices. OBJECTIVE: The aim was to investigate differences in food motives between socioeconomic groups by means of a DCE. DESIGN: A DCE was carried out during a face-to-face interview among older adults as part of the Health and Living Conditions in Eindhoven and surrounding cities (GLOBE) cohort study, The Netherlands. Participants (n = 399; mean age: 63.3 y) were offered a series of choice sets about a usual dinner at home and were asked to choose in each choice set between 2 meals and an opt-out choice, with different combinations of attribute levels. We included 5 meal attributes (taste, healthiness, preparation time, travel time to shops, and price) and 3 or 4 levels for each attribute. Data were analyzed by multinomial logit models. RESULTS: Healthiness, taste, price, and travel time to the grocery store proved to significantly influence older adults' meal decisions; preparation time was not significant. Healthiness was the most important attribute for all of the participants. More highly educated participants rated a healthy and less expensive meal to be more important than did less educated participants. Those with a high income rated a meal that was healthy and very tasteful to be more important than did those with a lower income. CONCLUSIONS: Healthiness, taste, price, and travel time to grocery shops influenced older adults' meal decisions. Higher socioeconomic groups valued health more than did lower socioeconomic groups. DCEs represent a promising method to gain insight into the relative importance of motives for food choices. This trial was registered at www.isrctn.com as ISRCTN60293770.
Authors: Antonio Augusto Ferreira Carioca; Bartira Gorgulho; Juliana Araujo Teixeira; Regina Mara Fisberg; Dirce Maria Marchioni Journal: PLoS One Date: 2017-10-16 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Joost Oude Groeniger; Frank J van Lenthe; Mariëlle A Beenackers; Carlijn B M Kamphuis Journal: Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act Date: 2017-03-27 Impact factor: 6.457
Authors: Tanti Irawati Rosli; Yoke Mun Chan; Rahimah Abdul Kadir; Tengku Aizan Abdul Hamid Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2019-06-13 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Marjolein C Harbers; Cédric N H Middel; Josine M Stuber; Joline W J Beulens; Femke Rutters; Yvonne T van der Schouw Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-06-07 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Marta Jeruszka-Bielak; Anna Kollajtis-Dolowy; Aurelia Santoro; Rita Ostan; Agnes A M Berendsen; Amy Jennings; Nathalie Meunier; Anna Marseglia; Elodie Caumon; Rachel Gillings; Lisette C P G M de Groot; Claudio Franceschi; Sophie Hieke; Barbara Pietruszka Journal: Front Physiol Date: 2018-07-31 Impact factor: 4.566