| Literature DB >> 28231134 |
Delores Chambers1, Uyen T X Phan2, Sirichat Chanadang3, Curtis Maughan4, Karolina Sanchez5, Brizio Di Donfrancesco6, David Gomez7, Federica Higa8, Han Li9, Edgar Chambers10, Eyyup Esen11.
Abstract
Several studies in different countries have been conducted to investigate factors affecting food choices. The objective of this study was to understand the motivations of specific food and beverage choices for different eating occasions in a typical diet of the Turkish people. A convenience sample of 141 respondents from seven different geographical regions in Turkey completed an online survey questionnaire that included questions about demographic information and details about their latest eating occasion. Respondents reported all of their motivations for choosing each food/beverage item reported for that specific eating occasion. Results indicated that different motivations played different roles in food choices of people in Turkey. Liking was a key characteristic for all eating occasions, but key natural concerns were even more important at breakfast, and need and hunger were more important for a mid-afternoon snack. Lunch involved additional motivations such as Sociability, Variety Seeking, and Social Norms. In addition to Liking, choices of different food groups were also driven by other motivations such as Habits, Convenience, Need and Hunger, Natural Concerns, and Health. This study helped better understand the current dietary patterns of Turkish people as well as the motives underlying their choices of foods and beverages for different meals and snacks. These findings could be useful for dietary campaigns that aim to improve eating behaviors in Turkey.Entities:
Keywords: Turkey; Turkish; dietary behavior; food choice; motivation
Year: 2016 PMID: 28231134 PMCID: PMC5302344 DOI: 10.3390/foods5020039
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Foods ISSN: 2304-8158
Demographic information representing the participants in the study (N = 141).
| Demographic Information | Number of Participants | Percent of Participants | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gender | Female | 69 | 44.0% |
| Male | 79 | 56.0% | |
| Age | 18–22 | 15 | 11% |
| 23–44 | 106 | 75% | |
| 45–60 | 18 | 13% | |
| 61–74 | 2 | 1% | |
| Household income | <15,000 Lira | 36 | 25.5% |
| 15,000–29,999 Lira | 12 | 14.9% | |
| 30,000–39,999 Lira | 21 | 14.2% | |
| 40,000–79,999 Lira | 20 | 17.7% | |
| >80,000 Lira | 25 | 8.5% | |
| Prefer not to answer | 27 | 19.1% | |
| Employment status | Employed full time | 97 | 68.8% |
| Employed part time | 6 | 4.3% | |
| Homemaker | 6 | 4.3% | |
| Retired | 3 | 2.1% | |
| Unemployed | 29 | 20.6% | |
| Geographical Region | Aegean | 47 | 33.3% |
| Marmara Sea | 42 | 29.8% | |
| Central Anatolia | 17 | 12.1% | |
| Black Sea | 15 | 10.6% | |
| Southeastern Anatolia | 11 | 7.8% | |
| Mediterranean | 5 | 3.5% | |
| Eastern Anatolia | 4 | 2.8% | |
| Most recent meal | Breakfast | 30 | 21.3% |
| Lunch | 26 | 18.4% | |
| Mid-afternoon snack | 11 | 7.8% | |
| Dinner | 47 | 33.3% | |
| Late Night Snack | 27 | 19.1% |
Figure 1Modified version of The Eating Motivation Survey used in this study. This questionnaire included 49 motivation subscales measuring 17 motivation constructs. Reproduced with permission from Chambers and Phan, Journal of Sensory Studies, Wiley Blackwell, 2016 [11].
Figure 2Number of items consumed during each eating occasion by participants in the study.
Figure 3Location of eating for the participants during their reported eating occasion.
Figure 4Other people present with the participants during their reported eating occasion.
The proportions of different food categories consumed in each eating occasion reported by 141 Turkish respondents.
| Meal | Breakfast | Lunch | Afternoon Snack | Dinner | Late Night Snack | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total Food Items | 77 | 48 | 15 | 107 | 57 | |
| 4.17 | 6.54 | 8.77 | ||||
| Cereal grains & pasta | 2.60 | 12.50 | 6.67 | 12.15 | 12.28 | 0.18 |
| 6.25 | 6.67 | 5.61 | 7.02 | |||
| Fruits | 15.58 | 10.42 | 6.67 | 8.41 | 22.81 | 0.09 |
| Protein | 7.79 | 22.92 | 20.00 | 17.76 | 15.79 | 0.19 |
| Soups | 2.60 | 10.42 | 0.00 | 14.02 | 7.02 | 0.05 |
| 6.25 | 20.00 | 0.93 | 3.51 | |||
| 6.49 | 0.00 | |||||
| 4.17 | 0.00 | 7.02 | ||||
| Water | 2.60 | 4.17 | 0.00 | 6.54 | 1.75 | 0.46 |
* p-Value of two-sided proportion test using Pearson’s Chi-square test statistic, df = 5, value in bold: significant at alpha = 0.05. The numbers of food items per each group were computed into proportion by dividing by the total food items for each eating occasion.
Figure 5Frequency of responses (%) of 17 motivations for each eating occasion.
Figure 6The Correspondence Analysis factor map representing five eating occasions and seventeen corresponding motivations. This factor map represents 75.31% of the total variance, with factor one contributing 51.47%, and factor two contributing 23.84% of the variance.
The percentages of the motivations associated with 10 different food groups reported by 141 Turkish respondents.
| Number of Items ( | Baked Products | Cereal Grains and Pasta | Dairy | Fruits | Protein | Soups | Sweets | Tea | Vegetables | Water | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 32 | 29 | 31 | 40 | 48 | 27 | 17 | 16 | 46 | 12 | ||
| Liking | 17.71 | 18.39 | 21.51 | 24.17 | 29.86 | 19.75 | 17.65 | 20.83 | 19.57 | 16.67 | 0.42 |
| Habits | 14.58 | 20.69 | 15.05 | 16.67 | 14.58 | 11.11 | 11.76 | 6.25 | 14.49 | 5.56 | 0.41 |
| Need and Hunger | 15.63 | 17.24 | 9.68 | 15.00 | 23.61 | 18.52 | 13.73 | 14.58 | 15.22 | 2.78 | 0.10 |
| Health | 9.38 | 20.69 | 7.53 | 15.83 | 10.42 | 12.35 | 11.76 | 14.58 | 14.49 | 16.67 | 0.30 |
| Convenience | 10.94 | 14.66 | 6.45 | 12.50 | 12.50 | 7.41 | 16.18 | 14.06 | 9.24 | 8.33 | 0.37 |
| Pleasure | 9.38 | 14.94 | 13.98 | 15.83 | 17.36 | 9.88 | 13.73 | 6.25 | 12.32 | 13.89 | 0.61 |
| Traditional Eating | 8.33 | 4.60 | 3.23 | 9.17 | 10.42 | 6.17 | 7.84 | 8.33 | 5.80 | 0.00 | 0.36 |
| Natural Concerns | 12.50 | 13.79 | 8.06 | 11.25 | 12.50 | 11.11 | 17.65 | 3.13 | 17.39 | 25.00 | 0.36 |
| Sociability | 1.04 | 3.45 | 5.38 | 4.17 | 1.39 | 0.00 | 2.78 | ||||
| Price | 3.13 | 5.75 | 3.23 | 9.17 | 5.56 | 3.70 | 5.88 | 4.17 | 6.52 | 2.78 | 0.67 |
| Visual Appeal | 1.04 | 0.00 | 2.15 | 0.83 | 2.08 | 0.00 | 3.92 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.26 |
| Weight Control | 4.17 | 9.20 | 9.68 | 8.33 | 5.56 | 3.70 | 11.76 | 0.00 | 8.70 | 5.56 | 0.26 |
| Affect Regulation | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.83 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.72 | 0.00 | ||
| Social Norms | 0.00 | 4.60 | 2.15 | 5.00 | 4.17 | 4.94 | 3.92 | 4.17 | 3.62 | 2.78 | 0.76 |
| Social Image | 1.04 | 2.30 | 1.08 | 1.67 | 2.08 | 1.23 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 2.17 | 0.00 | 0.94 |
| Variety Seeking | 0.00 | 0.00 | 1.04 | 0.00 | 3.13 | 1.09 | 0.00 | ||||
| Choice Limitation | 9.38 | 12.07 | 6.45 | 11.25 | 9.38 | 11.11 | 11.76 | 18.75 | 10.87 | 12.50 | 0.92 |
a p-Value of two-sided proportion test using Pearson’s Chi-square test statistic, df = 10, value in bold: significant at alpha = 0.05; b The sample size for Convenience was n × 4. Natural Concerns, Variety Seeking and Choice Limitation had sample size equal n × 2. The sample sizes for other motivations were n × 3.