Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Helsinki, P.O. Box 18, Helsinki, 00014, Finland.
Department of Food and Nutrition, University of Helsinki, P.O. Box 66, Helsinki, 00014, Finland.
Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2021 Jun 2;18(1):71. doi: 10.1186/s12966-021-01139-2.
Although sociodemographic differences in dietary intake have been widely studied, the up-to-date evidence on the corresponding variations in motives for food selection is limited. We investigated how sociodemographic characteristics and special diets in households are associated with the relative importance of various food motives.
Participants were members of the S Group loyalty card program across Finland who consented to release their grocery purchase data to be used for research purposes and responded to a web-based questionnaire in 2018 (LoCard study). Self-reported information on sociodemographic factors (age, gender, marital status, living situation, education, household income), special diets in household and food motives (Food Choice Questionnaire) were utilized in the present analyses (N = 10,795). Age- and gender-adjusted linear models were performed separately for each sociodemographic predictor and motive dimension (derived by factor analysis) outcome. The importance of each sociodemographic predictor was evaluated based on an increase in R value after adding the predictor to the age- and gender-adjusted model.
Age emerged as a central determinant of food motives with the following strongest associations: young adults emphasized convenience (∆R = 0.09, P < 0.001) and mood control (∆R = 0.05, P < 0.001) motives more than middle-aged and older adults. The relative importance of cheapness decreased with increasing socioeconomic position (SEP) (∆R = 0.08, P < 0.001 for income and ∆R = 0.04, P < 0.001 for education). However, the price item ("is good value for money") depicting the concept of worth did not distinguish between SEP categories. Considerations related to familiarity of food were more salient to men (∆R = 0.02, P < 0.001) and those with lower SEP (∆R = 0.03, P < 0.001 for education and ∆R = 0.01, P < 0.001 for income). Respondents living in households with a vegetarian, red-meat-free, gluten-free or other type of special diet rated ethical concern as relatively more important than households with no special diets (∆R = 0.02, P < 0.001).
We observed sociodemographic differences in a range of food motives that might act as barriers or drivers for adopting diets that benefit human and planetary health. Interventions aiming to narrow SEP and gender disparities in dietary intake should employ strategies that take into account higher priority of familiarity and price in daily food selection in lower-SEP individuals and males.
尽管社会人口统计学因素与饮食摄入之间的差异已得到广泛研究,但对于食物选择动机相应变化的最新证据仍然有限。我们研究了家庭中的社会人口统计学特征和特殊饮食如何与各种食物动机的相对重要性相关。
参与者是芬兰 S 集团会员卡计划的成员,他们同意将他们的杂货购买数据用于研究目的,并在 2018 年(LoCard 研究)回复了一个基于网络的问卷。本分析中使用了自我报告的社会人口统计学因素(年龄、性别、婚姻状况、居住状况、教育程度、家庭收入)、家庭中的特殊饮食和食物动机(食物选择问卷)信息(N=10795)。针对每个社会人口统计学预测因子和动机维度(通过因子分析得出),分别进行了年龄和性别调整后的线性模型。根据在年龄和性别调整后的模型中添加预测因子后 R 值的增加,评估每个社会人口统计学预测因子的重要性。
年龄是食物动机的核心决定因素,与以下关联最强:年轻人比中年人和老年人更强调便利性(∆R=0.09,P<0.001)和情绪控制(∆R=0.05,P<0.001)动机。随着社会经济地位(SEP)的提高,廉价的重要性降低(收入方面的∆R=0.08,P<0.001;教育方面的∆R=0.04,P<0.001)。然而,描述价值概念的“物有所值”这一价格项目并没有区分 SEP 类别。与食物熟悉度相关的考虑因素对男性(∆R=0.02,P<0.001)和 SEP 较低的人群更为重要(教育方面的∆R=0.03,P<0.001;收入方面的∆R=0.01,P<0.001)。有素食、无红肉、无麸质或其他特殊饮食的家庭的受访者比没有特殊饮食的家庭更重视伦理关注(∆R=0.02,P<0.001)。
我们观察到食物动机方面存在社会人口统计学差异,这些差异可能成为促进有益于人类和地球健康的饮食的障碍或驱动力。旨在缩小饮食摄入方面的社会经济地位和性别差距的干预措施应采用策略,考虑到在较低社会经济地位个体和男性中,日常食物选择中熟悉度和价格的优先级更高。