| Literature DB >> 29720742 |
Sanne Raghoebar1, Ellen van Kleef2, Emely de Vet1.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this paper is to test whether the IKEA-effect (Norton et al., 2012) - better liking for self-crafted products than for identical products crafted by others - can be exploited to increase liking and consumption of vegetable snacks in children. DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: A between-subjects experiment was conducted at an after school care facility. In total, 86 children aged four to six either crafted a peacock with vegetables or with non-food objects following an example. After the task, children ate snack vegetables ad libitum, and rated their liking for the vegetables and pride in crafting the peacock.Entities:
Keywords: Children; IKEA-effect; Vegetable consumption
Year: 2017 PMID: 29720742 PMCID: PMC5868546 DOI: 10.1108/BFJ-09-2016-0443
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Br Food J ISSN: 0007-070X Impact factor: 2.518
Figure 1Peacock made of vegetables
Figure 2Peacock made of beads
Differences in consumption amount, liking and perceived pride of participants in the experimental condition and control condition
| Experimental condition | Control condition | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean | SD | Mean | SD | |
| Consumption amount | 18.53 | 14.13 | 16.33 | 12.00 |
| Liking (range 1-5) | 3.91 | 1.59 | 4.12 | 1.20 |
| Perceived pride (range 0-2) | 1.86 | 0.47 | 1.84 | 0.49 |
Note: n = 43
Mediation analysis of perceived pride in the effect of the intervention on vegetable consumption and liking
| X→Y (c path)a | X→Y (c′ path) | X→M (a path) | M→Y (b path) | Indirect effect (a+b path) | Sobel test | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Outcome variables | CI 95% | |||||||||||
| Total vegetable consumption | 3.18 (2.82) | 0.26 | 3.08 (2.83) | 0.28 | 0.04 (0.11) | 0.67 | 2.13 (2.94) | 0.47 | 0.10 (0.44) | (−0.20, 1.23) | 0.23 | 0.81 |
| Overall vegetable liking | −0.21 (0.32) | 0.52 | −0.22 (0.32) | 0.50 | 0.04 (0.11) | 0.67 | 0.27 (0.33) | 0.41 | 0.01 (0.06) | (−0.05, 0.20) | 0.26 | 0.80 |
Note: aEffect of the intervention without mediator