Determination Of The Effect Of Body Mass Index On Food Choice Motivations On Female Consumers

Abstract

Aim: The aim of this study was to determine the underlying motivations of food choices in normal weight and overweight/ obese women.

Materials and Methods: The study was conducted on 18-65 years old 100 volunteer women who were employed by Gaziantep University. Volunteer individuals were divided into two groups according to their body mass index (BMI) as normal weight or overweight/obese. Then a study questionnaire which included sociodemographic characteristics, nutritional status, physical activity status of the individuals was carried out. 3-days food and 24-hours physical activity history was recorded as well as height-weight measurements. Food Choice Questionnaire (FCQ), to which validity and reliability had confirmed, was used to determine the motivations for food choices.

Results: Natural content, sensory appeal and health are the important motivational food choice factors for all participants. Price was the least important factor in food choice. When we analyzed into groups, sensory appeal, natural content and health were the most important motivational factors for normal weight women whereas natural content, sensory appeal and health were the most important factors for overweight/obese women. Natural content, weight control, health and ethical concern scores were significantly higher in overweight/ obese women than normal weight women(P<0,05). There were also statistically significant differences in diets and physical activity status of groups (P<0,05).

Conclusion: Food choice is a multifactorial and complex process and according to our results, FCQ subgroups’ such as natural content, health, weight control and ethics are influenced by BMI.

Keywords

• Food choice,body mass index,food choice questionnaire (FCQ)

Kadın Tüketicilerin Beden Kütle İndekslerinin Besin Seçim Motivasyonları Üzerine Etkisinin İncelenmesi

Abstract

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı, normal kilolu ve hafif şişman/obez kadınlarda besin seçimlerinin altında yatan motivasyonları belirlemektir.

Gereç ve Yöntem: Çalışma Gaziantep Üniversitesi tarafından istihdam edilen 18-65 yaş arası 100 gönüllü kadın üzerinde yapılmıştır. Gönüllü bireyler beden kütle indekslerine (BKİ) göre normal kilolu veya hafif şişman/obez olarak iki gruba ayrılmıştır. Daha sonra bireylerin sosyodemografik özellikleri, beslenme durumlarını, fiziksel aktivite durumlarını sorgulayan bir çalışma anketi uygulanmıştır. Üç günlük besin tüketim kaydı ve 24 saatlik fiziksel aktivite öyküsü ile birlikte vücut ağırlığı ve boy uzunluğu ölçümleri kaydedilmiştir. Besin seçimi motivasyonlarının belirlenmesi amacıyla, daha önce geçerlilik ve güvenirliliği yapılmış olan Besin Seçimi Anketi (BSA) kullanılmıştır.

Bulgular: Tüm bireyler için besin seçimini etkileyen en önemli üç faktör sırasıyla doğal içerik, duyusal çekicilik ve sağlık olarak bulunmuştur. Besin seçimini etkileyen faktörler arasında en az öneme sahip olan belirleyicinin ise fiyat faktörü olduğu gözlenmiştir. Gruplara göre (BKİ<25 ve BKİ≥25) analiz edildiğinde, normal ağırlıktaki bireylerde besin seçimini etkileyen en önemli üç etken sırasıyla duyusal çekicilik, doğal içerik ve sağlık iken, hafif şişman/obez bireylerde ise doğal içerik, duyusal çekicilik ve sağlık olarak bulunmuştur. Hafif şişman/obez bireylerde doğal içerik, ağırlık kontrolü, sağlık ve etik kaygı puanları normal BKİ’ye sahip bireylere göre anlamlı düzeyde yüksek bulunmuştur (p<0,05). Ayrıca gruplar arasında fiziksel aktivite düzeyleri ve bazı besin ögeleri bakımından da anlamlı farklar bulunmuştur (p<0,05).

Sonuç: Besin seçimi çok yönlü ve karmaşık bir süreçtir ve sonuçlarımıza göre, BSA’nın doğal içerik, sağlık, ağırlık kontrolü ve etik gibi alt grupları BKİ’den etkilenmektedir.

Keywords

• Besin seçimi,Beden kütle indeksi,Besin seçimi anketi (BSA)

References

1. Ares, G. & Gámbaro, A. (2007). "Influence of gender, age and motives underlying food choice on perceived healthiness and willingness to try functional foods." Appetite 49(1): 148-158.
2. Sağlık Bakanlığı (2016). Türkiye Beslenme Rehberi TÜBER 2015. https://dosyasb.saglik.gov.tr/Eklenti/10915,tuber-turkiye-beslenme-rehberipdf.pdf
3. Cabral, D., de Almeida M. D. V., & Cunha L. M. (2017). "Food Choice Questionnaire in an African country–Application and validation in Cape Verde." Food quality and preference 62: 90-95.
4. Cannuscio, C. C., Hillier, A., Karpyn, A. & Glanzet, A. (2014). "The social dynamics of healthy food shopping and store choice in an urban environment." Social Science & Medicine 122: 13-20.
5. Cunha, L. M., Cabral, D., Moura A. P., & de Almeida M. D. V. (2018). "Application of the Food Choice Questionnaire across cultures: Systematic review of cross-cultural and single country studies." Food quality and preference 64: 21-36.
6. Darmon N. & Drewnowski A. (2015). ''Contribution Of Food Prices and Diet Cost to Socioeconomic Disparities in diet quality and health: A systematic Review and Analysis.'' Nutrition Reviews 73(10): 643–660
7. Devine, C. M., Connors, M., Bisogni C. A. & Sobal, J. (1998). "Life-course influences on fruit and vegetable trajectories: qualitative analysis of food choices." Journal of Nutrition Education 30(6): 361-370.
8. Dikmen, D., İnan-Eroğlu, E., Göktaş, Z., Barut-Uyar B. & Karabulut, E. (2016). "Validation of a Turkish version of the food choice questionnaire." Food quality and preference 52: 81-86.

9. Eertmans, A., Victoir, A., Notelaers, G., Vansant G. & Bergh O., V. (2006). "The Food Choice Questionnaire: Factorial invariant over western urban populations?" Food quality and preference 17(5): 344-352.
10. Food And Agriculture Organization & World Health Organization. (2004). Human Energy Requirements. Report of a Joint FAO/WHO/UNU Expert Consultation. Rome, FAO Food and Nutrıtıon Technical Report Series 1.
11. Food And Agriculture Organization/ World Health Organization (2004). Human Energy Requirements. Report of a Joint FAO/WHO/UNU Expert Consultation. Rome, 17-24 October 2001. FAO Food and Nutrıtıon Technical Report Series 1, Rome
12. Fotopoulos, C., Krystallis, A., Vassallo, M. & Pagiaslis, A. (2009). "Food Choice Questionnaire (FCQ) revisited. Suggestions for the development of an enhanced general food motivation model." Appetite 52(1): 199-208.
13. Furst, T., Connors, M., Bisogni, C.A., Sobal, J. & Falk, L. W. (1996). "Food choice: a conceptual model of the process." Appetite 26(3): 247-266.
14. Grunert, K. G. (2002). "Current issues in the understanding of consumer food choice." Trends in Food Science & Technology 13(8): 275-285.
15. Januszewska, R., Pieniak Z. & Verbeke W. (2011). "Food choice questionnaire revisited in four countries. Does it still measure the same?" Appetite 57(1): 94-98.
16. Lewin, K. (1943). "Forces behind food habits and methods of change." Bulletin of the national Research Council 108(1043): 35-65.
17. Markovina, J., Stewart-Knox B. J., Rankin A., Gibney M., Almedia M. D. V., Fischer A. & diğerleri. (2015). "Food4Me study: Validity and reliability of Food Choice Questionnaire in 9 European countries." Food quality and preference 45: 26-32.
18. Merdol Kutluay T (2003). Toplu Beslenme Yapılan Kurumlar İçin Standart Yemek Tarifeleri, 3. Baskı, Ankara, Hatipoğlu Basım ve Yayım San. Tic. Ltd. Şti.
19. Milošević, J., Zezelj I., Gorton M. & Barjolle D. (2012). "Understanding the motives for food choice in Western Balkan Countries." Appetite 58(1): 205-214.
20. Nimptsch, K., Konigorski S. & Pischon T. (2018). "Diagnosis of obesity and use of obesity biomarkers in science and clinical medicine." Metabolism.
21. Pieniak, Z., Perez-Cueto F. & Verbeke W. (2013). "Nutritional status, self-identification as a traditional food consumer and motives for food choice in six European countries." British Food Journal 115(9): 1297-1312.
22. Prescott, J., Young O., O'Neill L. , Yau N. J. N. & Stevens R (2002). "Motives for food choice: a comparison of consumers from Japan, Taiwan, Malaysia and New Zealand." Food quality and preference 13(7-8): 489-495.
23. Pula, K., Parks C. D. & Ross C. F. (2014). "Regulatory focus and food choice motives. Prevention orientation associated with mood, convenience, and familiarity." Appetite 78: 15-22.
24. Rakıcıoğlu N., Tek Acar N., Ayaz A. & Pekcan G. (2009). Yemek ve Besin Fotoğraf Kataloğu-Ölçü ve Miktarlar, 2. Baskı, Ankara, Ata Ofset Matbaacılık.
25. Sobal J., Bisogni CA & Jastran M. (2014). ''Food choice is multifaceted, contextual, dynamic, multilevel, integrated, and diverse''. Mind, Brain, and Education. 8(1) 6-12.
26. Steptoe, A., Pollard T. M. & Wardle J. (1995). "Development of a measure of the motives underlying the selection of food: the food choice questionnaire." Appetite 25(3): 267-284.
27. Türkiye İstatistik Kurumu (2017). "Gelir ve Yaşam Koşulları Araştırması, 2016." http://www.tuik.gov.tr/PreHaberBultenleri.do?id=24579
28. World Health Organization (2019). BMI Classification 2004 http://apps.who.int/bmi/index.jsp?introPage=intro_3.html
29. World Health Organization. (2000) Obesity: Preventing and Managing The Global Epidemic: report of a WHO consultation. Geneva: World Health Organization; Report No: 894.