Elsevier

Food Quality and Preference

Volume 13, Issues 7–8, October–December 2002, Pages 489-495
Food Quality and Preference

Motives for food choice: a comparison of consumers from Japan, Taiwan, Malaysia and New Zealand

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0950-3293(02)00010-1Get rights and content

Abstract

With increasing emphasis on understanding consumer preferences in export markets, particularly in Asia, there is a need to determine those factors that influence food choice in other cultures. The Food Choice Questionnaire (FCQ), which assess the relative importance of nine factors thought to be important motives in food choice: Health, Mood, Convenience, Sensory Appeal, Natural Content, Price, Weight Control, Familiarity, andEthical Concern, was administered to groups of female consumers in Japan, Taiwan, Malaysia, and New Zealand. The Food Neophobia Scale was also administered in New Zealand, Taiwan and Japan. There was agreement between Taiwanese and (ethnically Chinese) Malaysian consumers in the most important food choice factors: Health, Natural Content, Weight Control andConvenience. In contrast, Price was most important for Japanese consumers and Sensory Appeal for New Zealand consumers. Familiarity was rated as least important by all countries, and Ethical Concern was also considered unimportant by all countries except Japan, where it was rated as relatively important. Older consumers generally gave higher ratings. Differences between consumer groups were also shown in the degree of neophobia. These data are important in demonstrating differing motives for food choice cross-culturally, and also provide indications of which food claims may be useful in promoting choice in the countries studied.

Introduction

The food industry in many Western countries has recently placed an increased emphasis on both global marketing and on consumer driven product development. These trends have been accompanied by an increase in research that has attempted to understand similarities and differences in consumer food perceptions and preferences across cultures (Prescott & Bell, 1995). Rozin (1996) has argued that culture provides the strongest determinant of food choice. To some extent, effects of culture reflect different dietary histories, which in turn will determine which foods and food qualities are acceptable in terms of their sensory properties. This process is at least partly reflected in the existence of culturally specific “flavour principles” (Rozin & Rozin, 1981).

Food choice is, however, a complex function of preferences for sensory (taste, odour, texture) characteristics, combined with the influence of non-sensory factors, including food-related expectations and attitudes (Rozin, 1996, Shepherd, 1989), health claims (Vickers, 1993), price (Vickers, 1993), ethical concerns (Sparks, Shepherd, & Frewer, 1995) and mood (Rogers, 1996). McFarlane and Pliner (1997), for example, found that nutritional information, both general (“good for you”) and specific (“low in fat”), was effective in increasing willingness to consume novel foods, at least in those for whom nutrition was important. Some of these effects are mediated via influences on responses to sensory properties (Solheim and Lawless, 1996, Stafleu et al., 1994, Pliner and Pelchat, 1991, McFarlane and Pliner, 1997, Tepper, 1992, Tepper et al., 1997). Thus, Aaron, Mela and Evans (1994) demonstrated that subjects who had positive attitudes towards reduced fat spreads rated such labelled spreads as more pleasant, more spreadable, and with better mouthfeel. Dividing subjects according to beliefs showed similar additional effects for smoothness and flavour.

Comparing variations between cultures in factors involved in food choice may have important implications for the export and marketing of foods. A number of studies in recent years have addressed such cultural differences. Cockerham, Kunz, and Lueschen, (1988) found, in a survey of Americans and West Germans, that American eating habits reflected attitudes towards both appearance and health, whereas those of West Germans were more closely related to being in control of their health. Nielsen, Bech-Larsen, and Grunert, (1998) used a laddering interview technique to elicit food choice motives of consumers from UK, Denmark and France for a selection of edible oils. There were cross-cultural differences in the degree to which health aspects, country of origin, and sensory characteristics, amongst others, were seen as important reasons for the preference of one oil over another. Differences in the extent to which food was linked to health and sensory pleasure were also evident in a reported survey of food attitudes in four cultures—Japan, France, Belgium and USA—and particularly between the USA and France (Rozin, 1996). Lappalainen, Kearney, and Gibney, (1998) in a large-scale study of attitudes towards food and nutrition in 15 EU member nations asked questions regarding 14 potential influences on food choice. Again, cross-cultural differences were strongly apparent. While quality/freshness was generally rated highly by all countries, and presentation/packaging low, there were large differences in the importance of price, taste, health, convenience, habit and content of additives between the different countries.

The development of a 36-item food choice questionnaire (FCQ; Steptoe, Pollard, & Wardle, 1995) has provided a means of simultaneously examining the relative importance of nine factors thought to be important in food choice—health, mood, convenience, sensory appeal, natural content, price, weight control, familiarity, andethical concern. The initial use of this instrument with a UK population sample found that sensory appeal, health, convenience andprice were the most important factors related to food choice. Lindeman and Vaananen (2000) recently used the FCQ with a Finnish sample, together with some additional questions relating to ethical motives for food choice, including animal welfare, environmental protection, political values, and religion. They found that, as with the UK sample, health, sensory appeal, convenience andprice were all rated highly. The scale has also been shown to differentiate well between subgroups based on sex, income (Steptoe et al., 1995) and vegetarianism (Lindeman & Vaananen, 2000).

Another factor which may help to explain cross-cultural differences in food choice, particularly in relation to unfamiliar imported foods, is the extent to which consumers accept new and/or unusual foods, as measured by the Food Neophobia Scale (FNS; Pliner & Hobden, 1992). The concept of food neophobia has been used to refer to both a behaviour and a personality style. Measured on groups of consumers, it may help to explain the degree to which novel foods are generally accepted within a society.

Here we report the results of a study which collected data on the FCQ (Steptoe et al., 1995) from female consumers in urban centres in four countries—Japan, Taiwan, Malaysia and New Zealand—and the FNS (Pliner & Hobden, 1992) on these same consumers in Japan, Taiwan and New Zealand.

Section snippets

Subjects

The data were collected on female consumers from urban centres in four countries—Japan (Tokyo), Taiwan (in 11 cities), Malaysia (Kuala Lumpur), and New Zealand (Hamilton)—during studies evaluating responses to a variety of different foods. Recruitment methods and criteria varied somewhat between cultures:

  • New Zealand participants, recruited through notices in public areas and a local newspaper article, were consumers of red meat;

  • Japanese participants, also red meat consumers, were approached in

Country

As can be seen in Table 3, there were main effects of country for each of the nine factors in the ANOVA. For all countries, the majority of factors had mean ratings reflecting agreement as to the importance of the relevant statements (a rating of four indicates neutrality). For Japanese consumers, however, Mood was rated as relatively neutral, as were Familiarity and Ethical Concern for the New Zealand consumers.

Age

There were main effects for age for the following factors: Health (F1, 645=15.02, P

Discussion

These results show both clear differences and similarities in the factors that are important for food choice in the four countries studied. Perhaps the most interesting of the similarities were those between the two groups of ethnic Chinese consumers in Taiwan and Malaysia who showed little separation on either dimension in the canonical discriminant analysis. Moreover, both groups were in agreement as to the four most important factors: Health, Natural Content, Weight Control andConvenience.

Acknowledgements

We wish to thank Ian Wakeling for statistical analysis and advice.

References (28)

Cited by (0)

View full text