Limits...
Understanding consumer acceptance of intervention strategies for healthy food choices: a qualitative study.

Bos C, Van der Lans IA, Van Rijnsoever FJ, Van Trijp HC - BMC Public Health (2013)

Bottom Line: Reviews of the effectiveness of interventions, however, show mixed results.To maximise effectiveness, interventions need to be accepted by consumers.General and intervention-specific beliefs are associated with consumer acceptance of interventions for low-calorie food choices.

View Article: PubMed Central - HTML - PubMed

Affiliation: Marketing and Consumer Behaviour Group, Wageningen University, Hollandseweg 1, Wageningen 6706 KN, the Netherlands. colin.bos@wur.nl.

ABSTRACT

Background: The increasing prevalence of overweight and obesity poses a major threat to public health. Intervention strategies for healthy food choices potentially reduce obesity rates. Reviews of the effectiveness of interventions, however, show mixed results. To maximise effectiveness, interventions need to be accepted by consumers. The aim of the present study is to explore consumer acceptance of intervention strategies for low-calorie food choices. Beliefs that are associated with consumer acceptance are identified.

Methods: Data was collected in the Netherlands in 8 semi-structured interviews and 4 focus group discussions (N = 39). Nine archetypical strategies representing educational, marketing and legal interventions served as reference points. Verbatim transcriptions were coded both inductively and deductively with the framework approach.

Results: We found that three beliefs are related to consumer acceptance: 1) general beliefs regarding obesity, such as who is responsible for food choice; 2) the perceived effectiveness of interventions; and 3) the perceived fairness of interventions. Furthermore, the different aspects underlying these general and intervention-specific beliefs were identified.

Conclusions: General and intervention-specific beliefs are associated with consumer acceptance of interventions for low-calorie food choices. Policymakers in the food domain can use the findings to negotiate the development of interventions and to assess the feasibility of interventions. With respect to future research, we recommend that segments of consumers based on perceptions of intervention strategies are identified.

Show MeSH

Related in: MedlinePlus

An overview of participants’ ratings. Acceptability (a), perceived effectiveness (b), and perceived fairness (c) of interventions. Differences between the first and second ratings of acceptance are depicted in (d). *’Restricting promotion of high-calorie foods’ was added after the interviews and therefore has eight ratings less.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4225717&req=5

Figure 2: An overview of participants’ ratings. Acceptability (a), perceived effectiveness (b), and perceived fairness (c) of interventions. Differences between the first and second ratings of acceptance are depicted in (d). *’Restricting promotion of high-calorie foods’ was added after the interviews and therefore has eight ratings less.

Mentions: Figure 2a depicts the acceptability of the nine archetypical interventions. When participants were asked to elaborate on the acceptability of interventions in Part 2, beliefs about both the effectiveness and the fairness of interventions frequently came up. Because these intervention-specific beliefs were also addressed individually in Part 3 and Part 4, respectively, they will be discussed separately in further parts of the results section.


Understanding consumer acceptance of intervention strategies for healthy food choices: a qualitative study.

Bos C, Van der Lans IA, Van Rijnsoever FJ, Van Trijp HC - BMC Public Health (2013)

An overview of participants’ ratings. Acceptability (a), perceived effectiveness (b), and perceived fairness (c) of interventions. Differences between the first and second ratings of acceptance are depicted in (d). *’Restricting promotion of high-calorie foods’ was added after the interviews and therefore has eight ratings less.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4225717&req=5

Figure 2: An overview of participants’ ratings. Acceptability (a), perceived effectiveness (b), and perceived fairness (c) of interventions. Differences between the first and second ratings of acceptance are depicted in (d). *’Restricting promotion of high-calorie foods’ was added after the interviews and therefore has eight ratings less.
Mentions: Figure 2a depicts the acceptability of the nine archetypical interventions. When participants were asked to elaborate on the acceptability of interventions in Part 2, beliefs about both the effectiveness and the fairness of interventions frequently came up. Because these intervention-specific beliefs were also addressed individually in Part 3 and Part 4, respectively, they will be discussed separately in further parts of the results section.

Bottom Line: Reviews of the effectiveness of interventions, however, show mixed results.To maximise effectiveness, interventions need to be accepted by consumers.General and intervention-specific beliefs are associated with consumer acceptance of interventions for low-calorie food choices.

View Article: PubMed Central - HTML - PubMed

Affiliation: Marketing and Consumer Behaviour Group, Wageningen University, Hollandseweg 1, Wageningen 6706 KN, the Netherlands. colin.bos@wur.nl.

ABSTRACT

Background: The increasing prevalence of overweight and obesity poses a major threat to public health. Intervention strategies for healthy food choices potentially reduce obesity rates. Reviews of the effectiveness of interventions, however, show mixed results. To maximise effectiveness, interventions need to be accepted by consumers. The aim of the present study is to explore consumer acceptance of intervention strategies for low-calorie food choices. Beliefs that are associated with consumer acceptance are identified.

Methods: Data was collected in the Netherlands in 8 semi-structured interviews and 4 focus group discussions (N = 39). Nine archetypical strategies representing educational, marketing and legal interventions served as reference points. Verbatim transcriptions were coded both inductively and deductively with the framework approach.

Results: We found that three beliefs are related to consumer acceptance: 1) general beliefs regarding obesity, such as who is responsible for food choice; 2) the perceived effectiveness of interventions; and 3) the perceived fairness of interventions. Furthermore, the different aspects underlying these general and intervention-specific beliefs were identified.

Conclusions: General and intervention-specific beliefs are associated with consumer acceptance of interventions for low-calorie food choices. Policymakers in the food domain can use the findings to negotiate the development of interventions and to assess the feasibility of interventions. With respect to future research, we recommend that segments of consumers based on perceptions of intervention strategies are identified.

Show MeSH
Related in: MedlinePlus