Seediscussions,stats,andauthorprofilesforthispublicationat:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/227680908
AcceptanceofFunctionalFoods:A
ComparisonofFrench,American,
andFrenchCanadianConsumers
ArticleinCanadianJournalofAgriculturalEconomics/Revuecanadienned
agroeconomie·November2006
DOI:10.1111/j.1744-7976.2006.00071.x
CITATIONS
READS
62
196
4authors,including:
MauriceDoyon
LavalUniversity
56PUBLICATIONS275CITATIONS
SEEPROFILE
JaneKolodinsky
UniversityofVermont
111PUBLICATIONS1,160CITATIONS
SEEPROFILE
Availablefrom:JaneKolodinsky
Retrievedon:18September2016
Acceptance of Functional Foods: A Comparison
of French, American, and French Canadian
Consumers
JoAnne Labrecque,1 Maurice Doyon,2 François Bellavance3
and Jane Kolodinsky4
1
Associate Professor, Department of Marketing, HEC Montreal, 3000, chemin de la
Côte-Sainte-Catherine, Montréal, Québec, Canada H3T 2A7 (phone: 514-340-6800;
fax: 514-340-5631; e-mail: [email protected]).
2
Invited Professor, UMR GAEL INRA, Université Pierre Mendès France, France and
Associate Professor, Department of Agricultural Economics and Consumer Science, Laval
University, Canada.
3
Associate Professor, Department of Management Sciences, HEC Montreal, Canada.
4
Professor, Department of Community, Development and Applied Economics,
University of Vermont, Vermont.
Food products have diversified with industry globalization. To market functional foods efficiently, food
managers must gauge cross-cultural variance of functional food acceptance. Expanding on previous
research, we investigate young consumers’ acceptance of functional foods. Data collected in French
Canada, United States, and France in 2004 reveal that business students are slightly in favor of
functional foods, and associate health benefits with these foods but very few product-related benefits.
Students do not have strong opinions on the trustworthiness of information and expressed a slight
interest in purchasing this type of product. Analyses of cultural differences revealed significant, albeit
small, divergence in these variables. Statistical analysis performed on the full sample assessed the
impact of food attitudes and other cognitive and attitudinal factors on the general attitude toward
functional foods. Health and product-related benefits and belief about the credibility of information
are the main positive determinants of the acceptance of functional foods, followed by high knowledge.
Apart from the negative impact of Neophobia, none of the other food attitudes influences attitudes
toward functional foods. Linear regressions performed on each subgroup indicated similar positive
cross-cultural results for health and product-related benefits. However, cross-cultural differences are
detected for knowledge, credibility of information, and food attitudes that influence acceptance of
functional foods.
Les produits alimentaires se sont diversifiés avec l’avènement de la mondialisation. Pour commercialiser efficacement les aliments fonctionnels, les gestionnaires du secteur alimentaire doivent évaluer
l’acceptation des aliments fonctionnels par les diverses cultures. À partir de travaux de recherche
antérieurs, nous avons examiné l’acceptation des aliments fonctionnels par les jeunes consommateurs.
Des données recueillies en 2004 au Canada français, aux États-Unis et en France ont révélé que les
étudiants en commerce étaient légèrement en faveur des aliments fonctionnels, leur associaient des
avantages pour la santé, mais très peu d’avantages liés aux produits. Les étudiants n’avaient pas
une très bonne opinion concernant la crédibilité de l’information et ont manifesté un faible intérêt
pour l’achat de ces produits. Des analyses des différences culturelles ont révélé des divergences,
petites mais significatives. Les analyses statistiques effectuées sur l’échantillon total ont évalué
l’impact des attitudes envers les aliments ainsi que d’autres facteurs cognitifs et attitudinaux sur
Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics 54 (2006) 647–661
647
648
CANADIAN JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS
l’attitude générale envers les aliments fonctionnels. Les avantages pour la santé, les avantages liés
aux produits et les croyances concernant la crédibilité de l’information sont les principaux facteurs
favorables à l’acceptation des aliments fonctionnels, suivis d’un degré de connaissances élevé. Outre
l’impact négatif de la néophobie, aucune autre des attitudes envers les aliments n’influe sur les attitudes
envers les aliments fonctionnels. Les régressions linéaires effectuées pour chaque sous-groupe ont
indiqué des résultats positifs similaires. Toutefois, nous avons noté des différences interculturelles
quant à la connaissance, à la crédibilité de l’information et aux attitudes envers les aliments qui
influencent l’acceptation des aliments fonctionnels.
INTRODUCTION
In most industrialized countries, changes in demographic patterns—especially the increasing proportion of women in the labor force over the last 30 years—combined with
the increasing use of more sophisticated technology, have profoundly modified the food
universe. These phenomena have prompted researchers to examine how consumers have
adapted to this new environment. Given that food decisions are complicated for consumers, research has focused on many factors that influence food choice, ranging from
the attributes of food itself to attitudes, motives, and intentions, and the influence of the
environment on decision making. Drawing on this sizable body of literature, the present
study adopts a cross-cultural approach to exploring how attitudes influence the acceptance of functional foods among French, American, and French Canadian young adult
consumers.
Researchers have developed measures of food-related attitudes in order to understand better how health-related and non-health-related factors influence dietary choices.
Steptoe et al (1995) introduced a multidimensional measure of motives related to food
choice, including nine factors labeled Health, Mood, Convenience, Sensory appeal, Natural
content, Price, Weight control, Familiarity, and Ethical concern. Testing the associations
between demographics and their measure of motives, these researchers found differences
in motives for food choice associated with sex, age, and income. Roininen et al (1999)
subsequently designed a Health and Tastes Attitudes Questionnaire from which they
identified three health-related factors—General health interest, Light product interest, and
Natural product interest—and three taste-related factors—Craving for sweet foods, Using
food as a reward, and Pleasure. They also found attitudinal differences based on age and
gender, with females being more interested in the health and taste aspects of foods than
males, and younger respondents being less concerned with health but more interested in
taste than older respondents.
Other researchers (Fischler 1990; Rozin et al 1999; Poulain 2002) documented food
functions in people’s minds and lives, and how consumers have modified their food habits.
In his seminal work L’Homnivore, Fischler (1990) discusses how changes in lifestyles and
food technology have contributed to a de-structuration of French eating habits, inducing an
increase in snacking, among other effects. Poulain (2002) investigated contemporary food
habits by exploring different aspects of the organization of daily food intake, and described
how social change and an abundant food supply have impacted French consumers’ food
habits and generated a shift toward “grazing,” characterized by a combination of solitary
food intake and structured meals taken in a social context. Rozin et al (1999) studied
how consumers’ beliefs about different food-related aspects vary between countries. They
ACCEPTANCE OF FUNCTIONAL FOODS
649
found that Americans associate food the most with health and the least with pleasure, and
the French are the most food-pleasure-oriented and the least food-health-related group.
Acceptance and perceived healthiness of functional foods and the determinants of
purchase intentions of food categories ranging from organic to genetically modified foods,
including functional foods, have been studied extensively (Bredahl 2001; Makatouni 2002;
Bech-Larsen and Grunert 2003; Cox et al 2004; Urula and Lähteenmäki 2004; Verbeke
2005). According to Verbeke (2005), belief in the health benefits of functional foods is the
main determinant of acceptance, followed by the presence of an ill family member, but
decreases disproportionately with claimed awareness of the concept. This result refuted
the IFIC (1999) findings identifying knowledge as one of the major motivations to either
purchase or consume functional foods (in Verbeke 2005). Moreover, these effects were
found to outweigh socio-demographic variables as potential determinants of functional
foods acceptance. Cox et al (2004), referring to Protection Motivation Theory, examined middle-aged consumers’ intentions to consume different prototypes of functional
foods that could improve memory. They demonstrated that perceived “efficacy” and selfefficacy, related to the impact of the consumption of functional foods on preventing
memory loss, are the most important determinants of intentions to consume functional
foods. Perceptions of functional foods have been compared across cultures. Bech-Larsen
and Grunert (2003) studied Danish, Finnish, and American consumers’ attitudes toward functional foods and their perception of the healthiness of these foods. Notably,
the Finnish had a more positive attitude and acceptance of the healthiness of functional
enrichments than the American consumers. The Danish respondents exhibited the most
negative attitude.
Nonetheless, few studies have explored cross-cultural variance of acceptance of functional foods within different segments of the population and how food attitudes and other
cognitive and attitudinal factors condition acceptance of functional foods. Given food
product diversification and industry globalization, food managers need more information on differences in food attitudes in order to target the right type of products to
the right type of consumers in each country. This study expands on previous research
and investigates young consumers’ food attitudes. Two aims motivate this study: (1) to
identify whether acceptance of functional foods varies across cultures; and (2) to verify
whether food attitudes and other cognitive and attitudinal factors influence acceptance
of functional foods.
METHOD
To attain the previously stated objectives, an exploratory study was conducted on
college/university students from three countries—France, United States, and Canada
(French Quebecers).1 The choice of countries is motivated by the fact that North America
and Europe are the second and third most important markets for the relatively new functional foods (Australian Government 2004), along with the accessibility of researchers to
consumers in the selected countries and the expected important contrast between French
and American food consumption and food attitudes; French-speaking Quebec consumers
are believed to be situated at the halfway point. Although our sample is not representative
of the population of functional food consumers, college/university students represent an
interesting group of consumers because they were identified, together with women and
650
CANADIAN JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS
consumers aged 55 years and older, as the segments most likely to adopt functional foods
in their diet (IFIC 2000). The exploratory nature of this study does not require that the
sample be representative of the population.
A self-administered questionnaire was distributed to college/university students. A
total of 611 students enrolled in a business program in Canada (Quebec n = 280), France
(n = 170), and the United States (n = 161) completed the questionnaire in 2004. To ensure
as homogeneous a sample as possible across countries, questionnaires of students under
age 18 years or over age 25 years were discarded. In the final sample, which consists of 545
fully completed surveys, French Canadian students predominate, with 227 respondents,
while the American and French respondent populations are of similar size, 155 and 163.
The average age of the sample is 21.9 years (Canada/Quebec: 22.8; United States: 21.7; and
France: 20.8) and the proportion of male and female respondents varies somewhat across
countries, with the largest proportion of male respondents in the United States (57%) and
the smallest in Canada (42%). The characteristics of the Quebec education system explain
why French Canadian students were slightly older than the sample average.2 Descriptive
statistics of the sample are presented in Table 1.
In addition to the demographic variables, the questionnaire included a set of general food-related attitude statements corresponding to scale measures taken from the
literature. Three scales measure eating-related attitudes—Pleasure (Roininen et al 1999)
and Cooking enjoyment and Convenience (Kolodinsky and Labrecque 1996). Two scales
measure health-related attitudes—Health Consciousness (Kraft and Goodell 1993) and
Diet–health link (Rozin et al 1999). Two scales measure novelty-seeking attitudes—Food
Neophobia3 (Pliner and Hobden 1992) and Innovativeness (Goldsmith and Hofacker
1991). All items related to these scales were measured on a 7-point or a 10-point Likert scale, with the categories ranging from “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree.” For
each scale, factor analyses (Oblimin rotation) using the full sample were conducted to
test the unidimensionality of the scales. Items with factor loadings below 0.5 were excluded from the analyses. Scale reliability was measured using Cronbach’s Alpha. High
internal consistency was observed within most food attitude scales, apart from those on
eating-related and novelty-seeking-related attitudes, for which Cronbach’s Alphas (α) were
slightly lower than 0.70. Final scores corresponded to the mean of the items defining the
scales.
Following this procedure, the original sets of items for the Pleasure, Health Consciousness, and Innovativeness scales were reduced from 6 to 3 items. The 10 items from
the original Food Neophobia scale loaded on two factors, each composed of 3 items and
Table 1. Sample descriptive statistics
Age
Country
Canada (Quebec)
United States
France
Total
Sex
Number of cases
Mean (SD)
Male (%)
Female (%)
227
155
163
544
22.9 (1.3)
21.7 (1.1)
20.8 (1.6)
21.9 (1.6)
42
57
52
49
58
43
48
51
ACCEPTANCE OF FUNCTIONAL FOODS
651
identified for the purpose of this research as Neophobia and Ethnic Food Enjoyment. The
other items of the original Neophobia scale were deleted because their loading on both
factors was under 0.5. Table 2 describes these results.
Another section included questions evaluating the respondents’ knowledge of functional foods, their overall attitude, their beliefs about the benefits associated with this
product category, and their perception of the credibility of the information concerning
these food products. Respondents were first asked to specify their degree of knowledge
of the term functional foods on a 4-point categorical variable with the question: Have
you heard the term functional foods? (yes, occasionally, very little, never). Responses
were sorted into three categories such that the first corresponded to participants who
reported having a good knowledge of this term, the second corresponded to those having
a partial knowledge of the term, and the third comprised respondents who did not know
the term functional food at all. This measure of knowledge is somewhat different from
that used by Verbeke (2005), who evaluated respondents’ knowledge of functional foods
based on three items measured on a 7-point scale, the sum of which was recoded into
three categories—low, medium, and high knowledge.4
Before answering the other questions related to functional foods, students were
provided with the following definition of functional food: Functional food products are a
new category of product with an added value, created to meet the expectations of consumers
who are more health conscious than ever. Within the food category, functional food products
are designed to offer nutritional elements that promote better health, in addition to the
nutritional elements they naturally contain.5
Students’ general attitude and credibility of information were measured by the scales
used by Kozup et al (2003) to evaluate overall attitude toward a food and credibility of nutritional information provided. Beliefs concerning health-related benefits were measured
on a 5-point bipolar scale designed by Kolodinsky et al (2003). Product-related benefits
referred to Bredahl’s (2001) corresponding items, and are associated with improvement
of standard of living and quality. Purchase intention was measured with respect to three
specific functional products: eggs with Omega-3, milk with calcium, and orange juice
with calcium. Factor analyses (Oblimin rotation) were also conducted to investigate the
unidimensionality of the scales. Table 3 reports the results.
In the last section of the questionnaire, respondents were asked to evaluate their
frequency of consumption of different products that included milk with Omega-3 and
eggs with Omega-3 on a 7-point scale, which ranged from “never” to “many times a
week.” They also indicated the health value that they associated with these products.
Questionnaire Translation
Since most scales were taken from articles written in English, the questionnaire was first
written in English, then translated into French and back-translated by a professional
translator to ascertain the equivalent meaning in both languages.
RESULTS
Attitudes Toward Functional Foods
Before discussing how beliefs and attitudes toward functional foods vary across countries,
levels of knowledge of functional foods are reported across countries. Results on the
652
CANADIAN JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS
Table 2. Description of the food attitude scales
Factor
Eating-related
Cooking enjoyment
(Cronbach’s α = 0.87)
Pleasure (Cronbach’s α =
0.61)
Convenience (Cronbach’s
α = 0.64)
Health-related
Health consciousness
(Cronbach’s α = 0.79)
Diet-health link
(Cronbach’s α = 0.78)
Novelty-seeking-related
Innovativeness
(Cronbach’s α = 0.60)
Item
On a scale of 1–10, where 1 means “not close at
all” and 10 “very close, ” indicate how close
each statement matches your point of view
I enjoy cooking
I enjoy cooking when I invite people to my
home
I enjoy trying new recipes
I enjoy looking at cookbooks and food
When I eat, I concentrate on enjoying the taste
of the food
I finish my meal even when I do not like the
taste of the food
An essential part of my weekend is eating
delicious food
On a scale of 1–7, rate the importance of these
aspects when you purchase food in general
Preparation time
Convenience
Usage
Factor loading
0.897
0.896
0.872
0.733
0.661
0.784
0.805
0.788
0.896
0.837
Please rate those statements on a 7-point scale
I read more health-related articles than I did
three years ago
I am interested in information about my health
I am concerned about my health all the time
On a scale of 1–7, how much of an effect do
you believe diet has on the following?
Heart disease
Obesity
Good health in general
Cancer
0.856
0.900
0.771
0.828
0.818
0.778
0.736
Please rate those statements on a 7-point scale
If I heard that a new food product was
available through a local store, I would be
interested enough to buy it
I would consider buying a new food product,
even if I hadn’t heard of it
I know more about new foods than other
people do
0.773
0.759
0.693
(Continued)
653
ACCEPTANCE OF FUNCTIONAL FOODS
Table 2. Continued
Factor
Neophobia (Cronbach’s α
= 0.67)
Ethnic food enjoyment
(Cronbach’s α = 0.81)
Item
Factor loading
I don’t trust new food
0.704
Ethnic food looks too weird to eat
I am afraid to eat things I have never tried
before
I like foods from different countries
0.810
0.804
At dinner parties, I will try new food
I am afraid to eat things I have never tried
before
0.790
0.851
0.898
degree of knowledge of the term functional foods (Table 4) show that higher proportions
of American students (56.9%) and French Canadian students (45.8%) had heard about
functional foods before the study when compared with the French students (10.6%). The
majority of the French students (63.8%) reported not having heard of the term before
the study. The proportion of American students who have heard about functional foods
is smaller (57%) than that observed in the American population by the IFIC in its 2000
survey, which found that 82% of Americans can identify a functional food but that 72%
had no concerns about these products. This variation might be explained by important
differences in the samples.
Analyses of variance and Scheffe’s tests were carried out on the attitudinal and belief
scores associated with functional foods and on the credibility of information about this
product category. As shown in Table 5, overall, respondents were slightly in favor of functional foods (5.05 on a 7-point scale), associated some health benefits with these foods
(6.52 on a 10-point scale), but very few product-related benefits (4.21 on a 7-point scale).
In addition, students did not have strong opinions on whether they could trust the information (4.12 on a 7-point scale) and expressed a slightly positive interest in purchasing
this type of product (7.55 on a 10-point scale). In terms of cultural differences, analyses revealed significant, albeit small, differences in the scores related to these variables.
French Canadian students expressed a more favorable attitude (5.27 on a 7-point scale),
associated higher health benefits (6.75 on a 10-point scale), reported having more trust in
the information (4.36 on a 7-point scale), and showed a stronger purchase intention (7.87
on a 10-point scale) than French students. Between American students and the other
students, no significant differences were detected apart from higher purchase intention
(7.65 on a 10-point scale) when compared with the French students (7.01 on a 10-point
scale). Thus, their means are more similar to those of the French Canadian students
than those of the French students. Overall, French students represent the subgroup that
associates the fewest benefits with functional foods and that is least in favor of this type
of products.
To further investigate the acceptance of functional foods among young consumers,
students were asked to report their actual frequency of consumption of two functional
foods (milk with Omega-3 and eggs with Omega-3), together with the health value they
654
CANADIAN JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS
Table 3. Description of attitude, belief, and credibility measures
Variable
Item
General attitude functional
foods (7-point scale,
Cronbach’s α = 0.95)
Based on what you have heard about
functional foods and on the definition given,
what is your overall attitude toward this
product category?
Favorable-unfavorable
Good-bad
Positive-negative
We want to know your opinions concerning
functional foods, compared with traditional
foods. For each pair of statements, please
indicate on a scale of 1 to 10 how close each
statement matches your point of view. Would
you say that functional foods are
Healthier–less healthy
Beneficial for health–harmful to health
Good for the immune system–harmful to the
immune system
More nutritious–less nutritious
Lengthens people’s lifespan–shortens people’s
lifespan
Please rate those statements on a 7-point scale
Functional food products will improve the
standard of living of future generations
Functional food products will increase my own
and my family’s standard of living
Functional food products are better quality
foodstuffs than other food products
In general, how do you perceive information
about functional foods?
Undependable–dependable
Untrustworthy–trustworthy
Dishonest–honest
Would you like to try such products?
Would you buy such products if you happened
to see them in a store?
Would you actively seek out such products in a
store in order to purchase them?
Health benefits (10-point
scale, Cronbach’s α =
0.87)
Product-related benefits
(7-point scale, Cronbach’s
α = 0.86)
Credibility of info (7-point
scale, Cronbach’s α =
0.90)
Purchase intention
(10-point scale,
Cronbach’s α = 0.82)
Factor loading
0.960
0.964
0.948
0.851
0.912
0.866
0.715
0.723
0.908
0.923
0.818
0.915
0.951
0.874
0.862
0.933
0.781
associated with these two products. This information is then used to validate previous
attitudes reported in Table 5. Apart from product-related benefits, the results reported
in parentheses in Table 5 were almost the same for the smaller sample of users and the
complete sample (users and non-users of functional foods). This fact seems to validate
the quality of the attitudes reported.
ACCEPTANCE OF FUNCTIONAL FOODS
655
Table 4. Knowledge of functional foods
Proportions
Total∗
Canada
United States
France
∗
N
Yes
Occasionally or very little
Never
538
225
153
160
38.5%
45.8%
56.9%
10.6%
30.3%
29.8%
35.9%
25.6%
31.2%
24.4%
7.2%
63.8%
Chi-square (d.f. = 4) = 137.4; p < 0.001 (seven observations were missing).
The sample mean on frequency of consumption shows that students who consume
milk with Omega-3 or eggs with Omega-3 do so about once a month. Analyses of variance
on these variables reveal cultural differences. Consistent with the results on purchase
intention, American and French Canadian students reported knowingly eating at least
one of the two functional products more often (about once a month) than the French
students (less than once a month). These results suggest that functional foods are not
part of young consumers’ regular diet, especially for French students. However, within
the segment of students who reported eating these two products once every other week
or more, significant proportions of respondents reported higher rates of consumption.
In fact, 42% of Canadian students and 51% of American students reported eating these
functional food products at least once every two weeks. This proportion was only 7% in
the French group. Moreover, consistent with our results related to beliefs about health
benefits, French Canadian (5.28) students attributed a higher health value to milk and
eggs with Omega-3 than French (4.55) and American (4.73) students did.
Correlations between the food attitude scales and the variables related to functional
foods were computed to investigate the associations between these variables. Table 6
reveals significant, albeit weak, associations between most of the food attitude scales.
The strongest statistically significant correlations were positive, observed between the
following variables: Attitude, Health benefits, Product benefits, Credibility of information, and Purchase intention. Accordingly, food attitudes and other cognitive and attitudinal factors appear to influence acceptance of functional foods, given that purchase
intention is positively correlated with variables such as attitudes toward functional foods,
health benefits, product benefits, and credibility of information.
To further investigate the determinants of the general attitudes toward functional
foods and to expand on Verbeke’s study of the role of cognitive, attitudinal, and sociodemographic variables in the acceptance of functional foods, multiple linear regression
was used to assess the impact of beliefs about health and product-related benefits,
knowledge, credibility of information, food attitudes, and gender (independent variables)
on the general attitude toward functional foods (dependent variable; see definition in
Table 3). The results for the full sample, presented in the first column of Table 7, show
that health- and product-related benefits, high knowledge, and the belief about the credibility of information have a positive effect on the general attitude toward functional
foods, while Neophobia has a negative effect. None of the other food attitudes significantly influences the attitude toward functional foods when the full sample is examined.
The variance explained (R2 ) by these variables is 40.6%. Similar to Verbeke (2005), we
5.273
5.06
4.741
5.05 (5.10)
6.753
6.55
6.191
6.52 (6.56)
1–10
Health
benefits
(p = 0.005)
4.413
4.22
3.941
4.21 (3.77)
1–7
Product
-related
benefits
(p = 0.001)
4.363
4.08
3.841
4.12 (4.16)
1–7
Credibility
Info
(p = 0.000)
7.873
7.653
7.011,2
7.55 (7.58)
1–10
Purchase
intention
(p = 0.000)
159
114
159
432
N
4.353
4.433
2.671,2
3.75
1–7
Frequency of
consumption
(p = 0.00)
Superscripts indicate countries whose mean scores differ at p = 0.01 (Canada = 1, United States = 2, and France = 3).
1. Canada
2. United States
3. France
Total
1–7
General
attitude
(p = 0.003)
Table 5. Summary of results related to functional foods
5.282,3
4.731
4.551
4.87
1–7
Health
value
(p = 0.000)
656
CANADIAN JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS
∗
1
0.386∗∗
0.400∗∗
0.359∗∗
−0.018
−0.037
0.090∗
0.042
0.075
0.060
0.075
−0.058
0.510∗∗
0.498∗∗
0.420∗∗
0.450∗∗
−0.014
−0.003
0.039
0.077
0.062
0.071
0.052
−0.129∗∗
1
Correlation significant at 0.01.
Correlation significant at 0.05.
∗∗
Attitude functional
foods
Health ben.
Product ben.
Credibility of info.
Purchase intention
Cooking enjoyment
Pleasure
Convenience
Diet–health link
Health conscious
Ethnic food
enjoyment
Innovative
Neophobia
0.080
0.000
1
0.339∗∗
0.283∗∗
0.085
0.095∗
0.042
0.117∗∗
0.082
0.094∗
1
−0.025
0.002
0.059
0.141∗∗
0.171∗∗
0.166∗∗
0.128∗∗
−0.081
1
0.313∗∗
0.004
0.065
0.094∗
0.039
0.022
0.075
0.157∗∗
−0.071
0.309∗∗
−0.125∗∗
1
0.292∗∗
−0.072
0.157∗∗
0.264∗∗
0.243∗∗
Table 6. Correlations between food attitudes and attitudes toward functional foods
Attitude
functional
Health
Prod.
Cred.
Purch.
Cook.
foods
ben.
ben.
info
intention
enj.
0.278∗∗
0.028
1
−0.030
0.121∗∗
0.151∗∗
0.156∗∗
Pleas.
0.090∗
0.101∗
1
0.014
0.050
0.123∗∗
Conv.
0.116∗∗
−0.007
1
0.275∗∗
0.084
Diet–
health
link
0.310∗∗
0.044
1
0.345∗∗
Health
consc
0.321∗∗
−0.165∗∗
1
Ethnic
food
enjoy.
1
−0.103∗
Innov
ACCEPTANCE OF FUNCTIONAL FOODS
657
658
CANADIAN JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS
Table 7. Determinants of the general attitude toward functional foods
Full sample
(N = 493)
βa
p
Health benefits
Product benefits
Knowledge-high
Knowledge-medium
Credibility of info
Cooking enjoyment
Pleasure
Health consciousness
Innovativeness
Neophobia
Ethnic food enjoyment
Diet-health link
Convenience
Sex
Adjusted R2
Maximum variance
inflation factor
Test of heteroskedasticityb
a
b
0.317 <0.001
0.308 <0.001
0.111 0.010
0.056 0.177
0.196 <0.001
−0.066 0.094
−0.028 0.465
0.050 0.211
−0.039 0.333
−0.134 <0.001
−0.017 0.681
0.023 0.533
−0.008 0.829
−0.009 0.806
0.406
1.52
p = 0.6317
French Canadians
(N = 218)
βa
p
Americans
(N = 118)
βa
p
0.368 <0.001
0.358 <0.001
0.278 <0.001
0.314 <0.001
0.130
0.077
0.199 0.185
0.047
0.485
0.250 0.089
0.207
0.001
0.147 0.120
−0.119
0.045
0.153 0.100
0.005
0.927
0.004 0.964
−0.017
0.781
0.135 0.123
−0.038
0.555 −0.139 0.121
−0.126
0.065 −0.042 0.615
0.089
0.222 −0.154 0.094
−0.012
0.827
0.061 0.451
−0.049
0.347
0.078 0.369
−0.059
0.273
0.117 0.172
0.445
0.381
2.11
4.21
p = 0.7363
p = 0.4776
French
(N = 157)
βa
p
0.215 0.002
0.375 <0.001
0.068 0.342
−0.019 0.782
0.158 0.027
−0.138 0.060
−0.044 0.546
0.049 0.485
0.022 0.752
−0.218 0.011
−0.017 0.826
0.012 0.859
−0.025 0.706
−0.025 0.709
0.355
1.71
p = 0.8348
Standardized estimate of β.
White’s test (1980).
did not find a significant linear relation between health-related attitudes and acceptance
of functional foods nor between gender and acceptance of functional foods. However,
whereas Verbeke (2005) reported a negative association between high knowledge and
acceptance of functional foods, our results show a positive association, in accordance
with the IFIC (1999) findings. In addition to knowledge, credibility of information has
a positive effect on acceptance of functional foods, at a magnitude higher than that of
knowledge.
Furthermore, linear regressions were performed separately for each country (last
three columns of Table 7). The results were similar to those of the model for the full sample,
except for high knowledge where the regression coefficients were no longer statistically
significant at the 5% level for all three countries and for Neophobia for the models with
French Canadians and Americans. This is mainly due to lower sample sizes in the separate
models. However, a more important difference between the model for the full sample and
the three separate models was found for the independent variable “Cooking enjoyment.”
While the impact of Cooking enjoyment on the general attitude toward functional foods
is negative and statistically significant for French Canadians at the 5% level and at the
10% level for French students, the impact is positive and statistically significant at the
10% level for the Americans.
To test whether the determinants of the acceptance of functional foods vary significantly across cultures, we included in the full model the main effect of country and
ACCEPTANCE OF FUNCTIONAL FOODS
659
the interaction terms of country with all independent variables (the results of this model
are not shown). The only statistically significant interaction was between country and
Cooking enjoyment (p = 0.0244). The lack of other significant interactions with country
implies that the relationship between acceptance of functional foods and the other variables is similar across countries. A contrast analysis for the interaction between countries
and Cooking enjoyment gave the following results: French Canadian versus French students, p = 0.672; French Canadian versus Americans, p = 0.016; French students versus
Americans, p = 0.010.
Multicollinearity and heteroskedasticity tests were also performed. Results of these
tests show that multicollinearity was not a serious problem; all values for variance inflation
factors in the regression models were much lower than 10 (Neter et al 1996, p. 387), while
heteroskedasticity tests (White 1980) were non-significant (Table 7).
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION
One objective of the present research was to identify whether acceptance of functional
foods varies across cultures. First, results on the level of knowledge of functional foods
reveal the lower level of knowledge of the term functional foods among French students
compared with the other students surveyed. Regarding acceptance of functional foods,
overall, students slightly favored functional foods, associated some health benefits with
these foods, did not have strong opinions on whether they could trust the information,
and expressed only a slight positive interest in purchasing this type of product. Results
on actual behavior supported these findings.
Cultural differences, albeit small, also emerged in the attitudinal and beliefs scores
associated with functional foods and regarding the credibility of information. The French
students reported less favorable attitudes toward functional foods and indicated that they
trust less the information on functional foods than the French Canadian students do. The
minor differences in the attitudinal and beliefs scores associated with functional foods
across cultures suggest that the market development of this product category could be
approached in this perspective as a global market rather than a local market. The adage
think global, act local apparently applies to this market.
To complete this investigation and meet our final objective, general attitude toward
functional foods was regressed on food attitudes and other variables related to functional foods. It is well recognized in the marketing literature that the attitude toward a
food product constitutes an antecedent of its purchase intention by consumers, and has
managerial implications. Regression results for the full sample showed that health- and
product-related benefits, credibility of information, and high knowledge have a positive
effect on the students’ attitude toward functional foods, while Neophobia has a negative
effect. Accordingly, while food attitudes make a very small contribution to the variability
of the general attitude toward functional foods, beliefs about benefits, be they health- or
product-related, together with credibility of information, are the main contributors to the
variability of acceptance of functional foods.
In contrast to Verbeke’s findings, knowledge was found to have a positive impact
on acceptance of functional foods. Striking findings from this research are the positive
impact of product-related benefits and credibility of information on the general attitude
toward functional foods. Other researchers have underscored the positive impact of health
660
CANADIAN JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS
benefits on acceptance of functional foods. Thus, our results suggest that the promotion
of other product benefits associated with functional foods, such as high quality, could
also help optimize market development. Nevertheless, this type of promotion should
be undertaken prudently, given the positive impact of credibility of information, which,
rather than the quantity of information, seems to have the strongest influence on the
general attitude toward functional foods.
In its qualitative study, which explored how to construct effective health messages
that are understandable, credible, and scientifically valid, the IFIC (2000) concluded that
there is no magic bullet to develop such messages. However, it provided guidelines that
include considering the level of awareness and concern consumers have about specific
health issues. The type of information, its consistency, and the credibility of the source of
the information have more influence on consumers’ beliefs about the benefits of functional
foods than the quantity of the information, and could have a significant impact on the
market development of this product category. Much remains to be understood about
how consumers react to information on functional foods, and more research should
be conducted to understand better how different segments of consumers with different
characteristics react to specific information on functional foods, such as food claims.
Combined with the fact that young consumers did not express strong confidence in
the available information on functional foods, these results suggest that to address the
young consumer market, not only would various stakeholders need to develop products
appealing to this target segment, but they would also benefit from harmonizing their
communication standards to avoid sending mixed messages.
NOTES
1
In Quebec, the survey was conducted at Laval University, University of Québec at Trois-Rivières,
and HEC Montréal. In the United States, it was conducted at the University of Vermont and in
France at ESSEC Paris. In all cases, subjects were recruited in business-related classes.
2
In Quebec, as opposed to France and the United States, after high school students have to go to
CEGEP for a period of two to three years before being admitted to a university program.
3
Neophobia, in this context, correspond to the fear of new things or experiences.
4
The scale was recoded as follows: low (1 and 2), medium (3, 4, and 5), high (6 and 7).
5
The definition was attributed to a group of University specialists in the questionnaire.
REFERENCES
Australian Government. 2004. Australian Functional Food: A Healthy Choice for Functional Food
Investment. Invest Australia.
Bech-Larsen, T. and K. Grunert. 2003. The perceived healthiness of functional foods: A conjoint
study of Danish, Finnish and American consumers’ perception of functional foods. Appetite 40:
9–14.
Bredahl, L. 2001. Determinants of consumer attitudes and purchase intentions with regard to
genetically modified foods—Results of a Cross-National Survey. Journal of Consumer Policy 24:
23–61.
Cox, D. N., A. Koster and C. G. Russell. 2004. Predicting intentions to consume functional foods and
supplements to offset memory loss using an adaptation of protection motivation theory. Appetite
43: 55–64.
Fischler, C. 1990. L’Homnivore. Paris: Editions Odile Jacob.
ACCEPTANCE OF FUNCTIONAL FOODS
661
Goldsmith, R. E. and C. F. Hofacker. 1991. Measuring consumer innovativeness. Journal of the
Academy of Marketing Science 19 (3): 209–22.
IFIC. 1999. Functional Foods: Attitudinal Research (1996–1999). IFIC, International Food Information Council Foundation, Washington.
IFIC. 2000. Functional Foods: Attitudinal Research, August: Quantitative and Qualitative Summary.
IFIC, International Food Information Council Foundation, Washington.
Kolodinsky, J. and J. Labrecque. 1996. The allocation of time to grocery shopping: A comparison of Canadian and U.S. households. Journal of Economic and Family Issues 17(3/4): 393–
408.
Kolodinsky, J., T. DeSisto and J. Labrecque. 2003. Understanding the factors related to concerns
over genetically engineered food products: Are national differences real? International Journal of
Consumer Studies 27 (4): 266–76.
Kozup, J. C., E. Creyer and S. Burton. 2003. Making healthful choices: The influence of health claims
and nutrition information on consumers’ evaluations of packaged food products and restaurant
menu items. Journal of Marketing 67: 19–34.
Kraft, F. B. and P. W. Goodell. 1993. Identifying the health conscious consumer. Journal of Health
Care Marketing 13: 18–25.
Makatouni, A. 2002. What motivates consumers to buy organic food in the UK? Results from a
qualitative study. British Food Journal 104: 345–52.
Neter, J., M. H. Kutner, C. J. Nachtsheim and W. Wasserman. 1996. Applied Linear Statistical
Models. 4th ed. Irwin, California: UCLA Academic Technology Services.
Pliner, P. and K. Hobden. 1992. Development of a scale to measure the trait of food neophobia in
humans. Appetite 19: 105–20.
Poulain, J. P. 2002. The contemporary diet in France: De-structuration or from commensalisms to
vagabond feeding. Appetite 39: 43–55.
Roininen, K., L. Lahteenmaki and H. Tuorila. 1999. Quantification of consumer attitudes to health
and hedonic characteristics of foods. Appetite 33: 71–88.
Rozin, P., C. Fischler, S. Imada, A. Sarubin and A. Wrzesniewski. 1999. Attitudes to food and the
role of food in life in the U.S.A, Japan, Flemish Belgium and France: Possible implications for the
diet–health debate. Appetite 33: 163–80.
Steptoe, A., T. M. Pollard and J. Wardle. 1995. Development of a measure of the motives underlying
the selection of food: The food choice questionnaire. Appetite 25: 267–84.
Urula, N. and L. Lähteenmäki. 2004. Attitudes behind consumers’ willingness to use functional
foods. Food Quality and Preference 15: 793–803.
Verbeke, W. 2005. Consumer acceptance of functional foods: Socio-demographic. Cognitive and
attitudinal determinants. Food Quality and Preference 16: 45–57.
White, H. 1980. A heteroskedasticity-consistent covariance matrix estimator and a direct test for
heteroskedasticity. Econometrics 48: 817–38.