app p098 09-11-95 09:03:29

Appetite, 1995, 25, 267284

Development of a Measure of the Motives Underlying the
Selection of Food: the Food Choice Questionnaire
ANDREW STEPTOE and TESSA M. POLLARD
Department of Psychology, St Georges Hospital Medical School, London
J ANE WARDLE
Imperial Cancer Research Fund Health Behaviour Unit, Institute of
Psychiatry, London
A number of factors arethought to inuencepeoples dietary choices, including
health, cost, convenienceandtaste, but thereareno measuresthat addresshealth-
relatedandnon-health-relatedfactorsinasystematicfashion. Thispaper describes
thedevelopment of amultidimensional measureof motivesrelatedtofoodchoice.
The Food Choice Questionnaire (FCQ) was developed through factor analysis
of responses from a sample of 358 adults ranging in age from 18 to 87 years.
Nine factors emerged, and were labelled health, mood, convenience, sensory
appeal, natural content, price, weight control, familiarity and ethical concern. The
questionnairestructurewasveriedusingconrmatoryfactor analysisinasecond
sample (n=358), and testretest reliability over a 2- to 3-week period was
satisfactory. Convergent validity wasinvestigated by testingassociationsbetween
FCQ scales and measures of dietary restraint, eating style, the value of health,
health locus of control and personality factors. Dierences in motives for food
choiceassociated with sex, ageand incomewerefound. Thepotential usesof this
measurein health psychology and other areas arediscussed.
1995 Academic Press Limited
I N1onic1ioN
Concernabout foodchoicesthat mayhaveadverseeectsonhealthiswidespread
in thedeveloped world, and is embodied in documents such as Healthy People2000
(1992) and The Health of the Nation (1992). Recommendations to restrict salt and
fat intakeandincreasecomplexcarbohydrateandbreconsumptionarecentral tenets
in public health nutrition guidelines (Cannon, 1992). Nevertheless, fat consumption
remainshighinthewesternworld, andisincreasingincountriesundergoingindustrial
development (Lands et al., 1990; Trichopoulou & Efstathiadis, 1989).
Eective modication of dietary patterns depends on an understanding of the
factors governing food choice. Recent years have witnessed growing interest in
studying the attitudes and beliefs associated with healthy eating. Measures of
ThisresearchwassupportedbyGrant L209252013fromtheEconomicandSocial ResearchCouncil,
U.K. Wearegrateful to Emma Winstanley for her assistancein data collection.
Addresscorrespondenceto: Dr A. Steptoe, Department of Psychology, St GeorgesHospital Medical
School, Cranmer Terrace, London SW170RE, U.K.
01956663/95/060267+18 $12.00/0 1995 Academic Press Limited
268 A. STEPTOE ET AL.
attitudes relevant to theoretical frameworks such as thehealth belief model and the
transtheoretical model of changehavebeen developed (Kristal et al., 1990; Smith &
Owen, 1992; Trenkner et al., 1990). For example, Glanz et al. (1993) havedescribed
measures of psychosocial factors inuencing fat and bre consumption, including
items related to beliefs in thelinks between diet and disease, perceived benets and
barriers to behaviour change, social support, social norms, motivation and self-
ecacy. This work holds the promise of leading to improved dietary modication
programmes (McCann et al., 1990). However, health is clearly not the only factor
peopletakeinto account when choosingtheir food, and a focus on health may lead
to exclusiveemphasis on a set of motives that areof limited signicancefor many
people. I t is therefore important to explore the role of other inuences on food
choice.
I t has long been recognized that food availability and cultural factors are
dominant in food selection. Cultural inuences lead to dierences in the habitual
consumption of certain foods and in traditions of preparation, and in certain cases
can lead to restrictions such as exclusion of meat and milk from the diet (Lau,
Krondl &Coleman, 1984). Foodisafocusof social interaction, andtheconsumption
of prestige foods may becomean index of social status(Sanjur, 1982). Thesystem
of provision, including food production and manufacture, marketing, delivery and
sale, has been shown to havea major impact on what peopleeat (Fine& Leopold,
1993). At theindividual level, tasteor sensory appeal, likes and dislikes, and sheer
habit areall relevant (Krondl & Lau, 1982; Rozin, 1984; Parraga, 1990). Tastemay
beparticularly important in selection of high fat diets, sincefats areresponsiblefor
the texture and aroma of many foods (Drenowski, 1992). On the other hand,
healthy diets may be consumed for non-health reasons such as concern about
appearance (Cockerham, Kunz & Lueschen, 1988). Weight control is a major
determinant of food choicefor individuals concerned about their body weight. The
growth in environmental awareness over the past two decades has led to concerns
about the use of natural ingredients and packaging that may have an impact on
purchasing decisions. Thereis also evidencethat stress and negativeemotions may
inuence food selection and consumption (McCann, Warnick & Knopp, 1990;
Wardle, 1987a). All these factors indicate that health is only one of many con-
siderations relevant to food choice. More eective implementation of health pro-
motionstrategiesmaydependontherecognitionof thestatusof healthincomparison
with other motives in theselection of food.
Multidimensional Measures of Food Choice
Eorts to develop multidimensional measures of factors related to food choice
at the individual level, including both health and non-health motives, have been
limited. Repertory grid approaches have been attempted, but these are time-con-
sumingandpatternstendnot tobestableacrossindividuals(Bell et al., 1981; Tuorila
& Pangborn, 1988). Ratings of dierent foods on dimensions such as pleasure,
health, tradition, convenience, familiarity, prestigeand priceweredescribed by Lau
et al. (1984) and by Rappaport and coworkers (1992), but in neither case was a
formal set of measures developed. A more systematic method was developed by
MichelaandContento(1986) inastudyof 5- to13-year-oldchildren. A seriesof foods
wereratedonanumber of dimensionsincludinghealthfulness, taste, convenienceand
social inuence. Substantial variations in the intraindividual correlations between
269 MOTI VES UNDERLYI NG THE SELECTI ON OF FOOD
evaluativeratings and consumption of thesesamefoods werefound, and clusters of
subjects characterized by dierent motivational patterns wereidentied.
ThisapproachhasbeenextendedbyWardle(1993) who includedratingsof liking
(taste) andhealthfor arangeof foodsinastudyof mothersandtheir adult children.
Two indices wereconstructed for each individual based on thecorrelation between
liking ratings and consumption frequency (taste index) and between healthiness
ratings and consumption frequency (health index). Thetasteindex was consistently
higher than the health index, although there was a good deal of variation across
individuals in both. The health index was higher in older women than either their
adult sons or daughters. The advantage of this method is that it circumvents the
need for subjects to give introspective reports on their motives, but it has the
drawback of being time-consuming and inappropriatefor large-scaleresearch.
More conventional questionnaire methods have been developed for the in-
vestigation of eating disorders, including the restraint scale (Polivy, Herman &
Warsh, 1978), the Three Factor Eating Questionnaire (Stunkard & Messick, 1985)
and theDutch Eating Behaviour Questionnaire(Van Strein et al., 1986). However,
thesemeasures aremoreconcerned with cognitiverestraints on food intakeand the
circumstances surrounding excessiveconsumption than with thefactors inuencing
foodchoice. An18-itemReasonsfor EatingScalewasdevisedbyHarmatz andKerr
(1981), and responses from110 students were factor analysed by Williams, Spence
and Edelman (1987). Six factors emerged, highlighting theimportance of aect on
eating, as well as sensory appeal, habit and pleasurein food preparation. However,
the questionnaire was developed for the investigation of obesity, and is limited in
scope.
TheNutrition Attitudes Survey, a measureof attitudes relevant to low-fat diets,
has been described by Hollis et al. (1986). Four factors emerged fromthesurvey of
357 adult volunteers, and included helpless and unhealthy, food exploration,
meat preference andhealth consciousness. Thehelplessand unhealthy and meat
preference factors were both associated with high meat consumption and with
elevated low density lipoprotein concentration in the blood, while the health con-
sciousness factor was associated with lower meat consumption. The helpless and
unhealthy factor identied by Hollis et al. combines items about convenience (e.g.
many days, becauseI min a hurry, I eat whatever is handy), mood and aect (I
eat morewhen I feel down), and lowself-ecacy (when it comes to food, I have
no will-power). Thehealth consciousness factor predominantly indexes willingness
to change (to avoid heart disease, I would be willing to alter my eating habits)
rather than concerns about health that currently govern food choice. The general
applicability of themeasureis limited by theomission of items concerning sensory
appeal and cost.
Evaluationof thisliteraturesuggeststhat thedevelopment of amultidimensional
questionnaireto assess theperceived importanceof dierent factors in food choice
might bevaluableboth in theinvestigation of food consumption and in health and
consumer psychology more broadly. The assessment of dierent factors within the
samemeasureallows direct comparisons to bemadeabout therelativeimportance
of dimensionssuchashealth, price, sensoryappeal andconvenience. Wehypothesized
that several distinct factors associated with food choicewould beidentied as well
as thefour listed above, sinceconcern with weight control, thedegreeof familiarity
of the food, and mood have all been cited as relevant in previous studies. I n this
paper, wedescribethedevelopment of themeasureand identication of dimensions
270 A. STEPTOE ET AL.
through factor analysis, its validation in an independent sampleusingconrmatory
factor analysis, testretest reliability over a 2- to 3-week interval, and associations
with other variables such as sex, age, income, eating style, social desirability biases
and health values. The relationship between responses to the questionnaire and
patterns of food consumption is a separate issue related to the applications rather
than validation of theinstrument, so will bepresented elsewhere.
S1inx 1
I n Study 1, a preliminary food choice questionnaire of 68 items was generated
through consideration of existing literature and discussion with nutritionists and
health psychologists. I tems covered various motives that have been identied in
other research, includingcommonlyrecognizedfactorssuchashealth, sensoryappeal,
convenienceof purchaseand cost, together with areas of potential signicancesuch
asenvironmental concernsandtheextent to which foodconformsto thepreferences
of family and peer group. Measures of dietary restraint, emotional eating, social
desirabilityresponsebiases, andhealthvaluewerealsoadministered, andassociations
with food choicefactors evaluated as evidenceof convergent validity. Demographic
characteristics including marital status, occupation, education, income and eating
habits (vegetarian etc.) werealso collected.
Mr1non
Subjects
Questionnaireswerepostedto105universitystudents, 90employeesof auniversity
library, and 635 peopleselected at randomfromtheelectoral register of a London
borough; 68%of thestudents, 64%of thelibrary employeesand 40%of theLondon
residents returned completed questionnaires, giving a sample of 358. The sample
included 220 women and 138 men, and ranged in age from1887 (mean 341, SD
152). Thebody mass index of participants averaged 237(SD 32). No respondents
stated that they suered froma chronic diseaserequiringa special diet; 409%were
married or living with a partner, 493% were single, and 98% were separated or
widowed; 64 subjects (179%) reported that children lived at homewith them; 61%
of thesamplewerein full or part-timeemployment, 232%werestudents, 89%were
unemployed or homemakers and 67% were retired. I n terms of education, 108%
had no formal qualications whilea further 156%left school havingcompleted the
General Certicate of Secondary Education (GCSE, equivalent to tenth grade);
384%hadcompletedhighschool withA level qualications, and352%haduniversity
degrees. Thereported annual incomeof subjectswasdistributed asfollows: <5000,
345% (mainly students); 500010000, 107%; 1000015000, 181%;
1500020000, 124%; 2000030000, 136%; >30000, 107%.
Materials
Preliminary food choicequestionnaire(FCQ)
The preliminary questionnaire was designed to assess a wide range of con-
siderations that might betaken into account by individuals when choosing what to
271 MOTI VES UNDERLYI NG THE SELECTI ON OF FOOD
eat (see Table1). Subjects were asked to endorsethe statement I t is important to
methat thefood I eat on a typical day . . . for each of the68 items by choosing
between four responses: not at all important, a littleimportant, moderately important
and very important, scored 1 to 4.
Dietary restraint and eating style
EatingstylewasassessedwiththeDutchEatingBehaviour Questionnaire(DEBQ)
(Van Strein et al., 1986). This measureconsists of 33items concerningeatinghabits
that assess threefactors: restrained eating, indexing restraint in theconsumption of
foodanddietingbehaviour; emotional eating, whereitemsconcerneatingwhenupset
or in negativemoods; and external eating, concerned with disinhibition and eating
in responseto thesight or smell of food. Scoreson each scalecould rangefrom15,
with higher scores indicating greater restraint, sensitivity to emotional conditions
andsensitivityto external cues. Thescalehasadvantagesover other similar measures
(Wardle, 1986), and has been shown to berobust in theU.K. population (Wardle,
1987b). The internal consistency (Cronbach ) scores in the present sample were
092, 095and077for therestraint, emotional eatingandexternal scalesrespectively.
Valueof health
The value that individuals place on good health was assessed using the Health
as a Value scale developed by Lau, Hartman and Ware (1986). This four-item
questionnaire consists of statements such as I f you dont have your health, you
dont have anything, and responses were scored on a six-point scale where 1=
strongly disagreeto 6=strongly agree. Ratings across thefour items wereaveraged
to producescoresin therange16. TheHealth asaValuescaleisareliablemeasure
that has been widely used in health research.
Social desirability
Social desirability biases were assessed using the ten-item reduction of the
MarloweCrownesocial desirability scaledeveloped by Strahan and Gerbasi (1972),
inwhichhigher scoresreect greater tendenciestowardsproducingsociallyfavourable
responses.
Rrsii1s
ScaleConstruction and Factor Analysis
The 68 items of the FCQ were factor analysed with varimax rotation. Various
solutionswereconsidered, but thestructurethat appearedbest to combineecological
sensewith parsimony involved ninefactorsthat together accounted for 495%of the
variance, with Eigen values rangingfrom124to 172. I tems with a severely skewed
distribution and thosewhich did not load clearly on a singlefactor werediscarded.
I n order to develop a relatively short questionnaire, a maximumof six was set on
the number of items included on each scale, and the highest loading items were
selected. This procedureresulted in theretention of 36 items.
Table1summarizesthefactor analysisperformed on the36itemFCQ. Thenine
factors accounted for 652%of thevariance. Factor 1 consists of six health-related
statementsandisthereforelabelledhealth(Cronbach=087). Factor 2iscomposed
272 A. STEPTOE ET AL.
T:nir 1
Food ChoiceQuestionnaire items and factor loadings
I t is important to methat thefood I eat on a typical day: Loading
Factor 1 Health
22. Contains a lot of vitamins and minerals 077
29. Keeps mehealthy 075
10. I s nutritious 075
27. I s high in protein 072
30. I s good for my skin/teeth/hair/nails etc 068
9. I s high in breand roughage 066
Factor 2 Mood
16. Helps mecopewith stress 079
34. Helps meto copewith life 079
26. Helps merelax 078
24. Keeps meawake/alert 060
13. Cheers meup 060
31. Makes mefeel good 057
Factor 3 Convenience
1. I s easy to prepare 082
15. Can becooked very simply 081
28. Takes no timeto prepare 076
35. Can bebought in shops closeto whereI liveor work 065
11. I s easily availablein shops and supermarkets 059
Factor 4 Sensory Appeal
14. Smells nice 080
25. Looks nice 072
18. Has a pleasant texture 070
4. Tastes good 053
Factor 5 Natural Content
2. Contains no additives 081
5. Contains natural ingredients 072
23. Contains no articial ingredients 071
Factor 6 Price
6. I s not expensive 087
36. I s cheap 087
12. I s good valuefor money 076
Factor 7 Weight Control
3. I s lowin calories 087
17. Helps mecontrol my weight 079
7. I s lowin fat 074
Factor 8 Familiarity
33. I s what I usually eat 079
8. I s familiar 079
21. I s likethefood I atewhen I was a child 066
Factor 9 Ethical Concern
20. Comes fromcountries I approveof politically 087
32. Has thecountry of origin clearly marked 079
19. I s packaged in an environmentally friendly way 043
I temnumbers refer to theorder in which statements werepresented in thenal 36 itemFood
ChoiceQuestionnaire.
Thefull factor analysis matrix is availableon request fromtheauthors.
273 MOTI VES UNDERLYI NG THE SELECTI ON OF FOOD
T:nir 2
I ntercorrelations (100) between Food ChoiceQuestionnairefactors
Sensory Natural Weight
Health Mood Convenience appeal content Price control Familiarity
Mood 34
Convenience 14 27
Sensory
appeal 19 32 5
Natural
content 59 28 5 22
Price 20 14 32 4 9
Weight
control 38 21 7 2 31 14
Familiarity 9 34 29 13 8 13 5
Ethical
concern 37 25 12 13 39 22 9 10
p<0001.
of six items concerningstress, copingand mood, and is consequently labelled mood
(=083). Factor 3hasveitemsandconcernseaseof foodpurchaseandpreparation,
and is therefore considered to be a convenience factor (=081). Factor 4 consists
of four statements related to appearance, smell and taste, and can be regarded as
indexing sensory appeal (=070). Factor 5 includes three items related to the use
of additivesandnatural ingredients, andislabellednatural content (=084). Factor
6has threeitems associated with cost of food, and indexespriceas amotivein food
selection (=082). Factor 7 consists of threeitems related to consumption of low
calorie food and is labelled weight control (=079). Factor 8 is also composed of
three items, and these are associated with familiarity (=070). Factor 9 has three
items concerned with environmental and political considerations and is labelled
ethical concern (=070).
Scoresoneachscalewerecomputedbyaveragingunweightedratingsfor individual
items, so couldrangefromaminimumof 1to amaximumof 4. Theintercorrelations
between the scales of the FCQ are shown in Table 2. A number of signicant
associations wereobserved. Themost prominent was between food choicemotives
related to health and to natural content (r=059). There were also moderate
correlations between health and mood, ethical concern and weight control, between
mood, sensoryappeal andfamiliarity, andbetweenconvenienceandprice. However,
noneof theseremaining correlations implied morethan 14%shared variance.
Theassociations between theFCQ and other measures such as theDEBQ and
Health as a Value questionnaire are discussed later in the section on convergent
validity.
S1inx 2
Study 2was designed to assess thereplicability of thenine-factor FCQ in a new
community sample, and test the reproducibility scores over a 2- to 3-week period.
I n addition, theassociations between theFCQ and two pertinent personality traits,
274 A. STEPTOE ET AL.
neuroticism and openness to experience, were evaluated. The internal subscale of
the Multidimensional Health Locus of Control (MHLOC), Health as a Value and
thesocial desirability measurewerealso administered.
Mr1non
Subjects
A postal survey was carried out with 400 students and 641 London residents.
Replies were received from135 (340%) students and 223 (348%) residents, giving
a sampleof 358. Themean agewas 305(SD 143) with a rangeof 1789years, and
the sample included 184 women and 174 men. The mean body mass index was
238kg/m
2
(SD 35), and no participants reported sueringfroma chronic disease
involvinga special diet. Theproportion of married subjects was 663%, while292%
were single and 45%were divorced or widowed. The number of respondents with
children livingat homewas 54(151%), a similar proportion to that found in Study
1. The proportion of respondents in full or part-time employment was 447%,
409%werestudents, 7%wereunemployed or homemakers and 64%wereretired.
Educationally, 109%had no formal qualications, and 123%had achieved GCSE
level. Theproportion with A levels(high school completion) was510%while258%
had degrees. I n terms of annual incomedistribution, 501%reported an incomeof
less than 5000; 500010000, 78%; 1000015000, 116%; 1500020000,
99%; 2000030000, 104%; >30000, 101%.
Two weeks after receipt of thequestionnaires, a repeat questionnaire(consisting
of theFCQ and a food frequency questionnaire) was sent out. Thefood frequency
data arenot described in this report. A total of 245(684%) of subjects returned the
second questionnairewithin a 48-day period. Theaveragenumber of days between
completion of thetwo questionnaires was 197 (SD 52).
Materials
I nadditionto the36-itemFCQ, healthasavalueandsocial desirabilitymeasures
described earlier, additional questionnaires wereas follows.
Personality
Two factors fromthe NEO Five-Factor I nventory (FormS) wereadministered
(Costa& McCrae, 1991). Weselected neuroticismaspotentially relevant in thelight
of itsrelationshipwithhealthrisk, stressandcoping, andtheopennessto experience
factor aspotentially relevant to willingnessto eat awiderangeof foods. Each factor
consists of twelve items rated on a ve-point scale, and scores could range from0
to48withhigher ratingsrepresentinggreater neuroticismandopennesstoexperience.
Thereliability of themeasurehas been extensively evaluated, and it has been used
widely inpersonality research, counsellingandhealth psychology (Costa& McCrae,
1992).
Locus of control
Respondents beliefs in their ability to inuence their own health status were
assessed with theinternal health locus of control scale(FormB) fromtheMHLOC
275 MOTI VES UNDERLYI NG THE SELECTI ON OF FOOD
(Wallston, Wallston & DeVellis, 1978). This scale consists of six items (e.g. I am
directly responsible for my health), and subjects responded on a six-item scale
ranging from 1=strongly disagree to 6=strongly agree. Ratings were averaged to
produce a score in the range 16, with higher scores reecting greater perceptions
of internal control over health.
Data Analysis
Conrmatory factor analysis was carried out with structural equation modelling
using the EQS program (Bentler, 1989), with the generalized least squares (GLS)
normal theory estimation method. Because
2
t indices aresensitiveto samplesize,
models with good t may show large
2
values when the sample size is large. We
thereforeusedtheratio of chi-squaredto degreesof freedomassuggestedby Marsh,
Balla and McDonald (1988), with values under ve indicating reasonable t. I n
addition, the non-normed t index (NNFI , Bentler & Bonett, 1980) and the com-
parativet index (CFI , Bentler, 1990) wereused to evaluatemodel t.
Rrsii1s
Conrmatory Factor Analysis
Thesimplenine-factor model in which each itemof theFCQ loaded on a single
factor provided a good t for thedata collected in Study 2 (n=358),
2
=997, df=
594, p<0001; NNFI =0991; CFI =0991 (Fig. 1). All parameters estimates were
signicant at p<0001. Allowingfactorsto intercorrelategaveamodest improvement
in t. These analyses indicate that the FCQ factor structure identied in Table 1
was conrmed in theindependent Study 2 sample.
TestRetest Reliability and I nternal Consistency
I t can beseen that all correlations between scores at thetwo administrations of
each FCQ scalewere>070 (Table3), suggesting that thereliability of thescales is
acceptable. The mean scores on the two occasions were signicantly dierent for
two factors, healthand mood, t (245)=242and 298respectively, ps<0025. I n each
case, averageratingswereslightly reduced on thesecond occasion. I ntercorrelations
betweenthefactorsweresimilar to thosedetailedfor Study1inTable2. Theinternal
consistencyof theFCQfactorswashigh, withCronbach scoresasfollows: health=
081, mood=083, convenience=084, sensory appeal=072, natural content=086,
price=083, weight control=085, familiarity=072, ethical concern=074.
Associations with Sex, Ageand I ncome
A comparison was made of body mass index and of scores on the FCQ scales
in Studies 1 and 2, including sex as a factor and covarying for age. No signicant
dierences between studies wereobserved. Consequently, thesamples fromStudies
1 and 2 werecombined for investigating dierences by sex, ageand income.
Themultivariateanalysis of variancecomparing men and women with ageas a
covariateshowedanoverall eect of sex, F(9,651)=143, p<0001(Table4). Separate
276 A. STEPTOE ET AL.
Ficir 1. Summary of conrmatory factor analysis model for theFood ChoiceQues-
tionnaire. Rectangles represent themeasured variables, with itemnumbers corresponding to
items in theFCQ (seeTable1). Largecircles arelatent constructs (factors) and small circles
areresidual variances (100). Parameter estimates arestandardized (100).
T:nir 3
Testretest reliability of theFood ChoiceQuestionnaire(n=245)
Scale Time1 Time2
Mean Standard Mean Standard Correlation
deviation deviation coecient
Health 283 072 277 070 0814
Mood 211 073 201 077 0771
Convenience 275 080 274 079 0830
Sensory appeal 299 063 294 065 0729
Natural content 247 086 248 086 0811
Price 283 080 279 079 0773
Weight control 238 088 237 084 0814
Familiarity 175 068 180 077 0714
Ethical concern 185 078 181 076 0801
univariate tests indicated signicant dierences on seven of the nine factors,
F(1,659)=992to579, p<0001, withonlysensoryappeal andfamiliaritynot diering
between thesexes. For all theother scales, theratings for women weresignicantly
277 MOTI VES UNDERLYI NG THE SELECTI ON OF FOOD
T:nir 4
AverageratingsontheFoodChoiceQuestionnaireinmenandwomen.
Studies 1 and 2 combined (n=706)
Scale Men Women
Mean Standard Mean Standard
deviation deviation
Health 264 077 301 062
Mood 200 073 221 074
Convenience 263 076 287 073
Sensory appeal 292 063 300 060
Natural content 227 084 264 083
Price 262 082 288 075
Weight control 201 081 260 079
Familiarity 179 071 179 071
Ethical concern 177 074 206 076
higher than for men. Eects were particularly prominent for health and weight
control, with mean dierences of 036 and 059 respectively.
There were a number of signicant correlations between FCQ scales and age.
For both women and men, signicant positivecorrelations werefound between age
and natural content (r=022 and 023, p<0001), familiarity (r=030 and 018,
p<0001) and ethical concern (r=012 and 020, p<0025). I n addition, positive
correlations in women were seen between age and health (r=022, p<0001) and
sensory appeal (r=018, p<0001) as factors inuencing food choice. Among men,
mood (r=017, p<0005) and weight control (r=025, p<0001) were positively cor-
related with age. Neither sex showed any association between convenience or price
and age. The signicance of these eects was unchanged when social desirability
was taken into account using partial correlations.
The impact of income on FCQ scales was evaluated in the expectation that
peoplewith larger incomes would beless inuenced by pricein their food choices.
The combined samples of Studies 1 and 2 were divided into three income groups:
low (<5000, n=270), moderate (500020000, n=228) and high (>20000, n=
148). Multivariate analysis of variance with income as a grouping factor and age,
sex and social desirability as covariates produced a signicant overall incomeeect,
F(18,1266)=119, p<00001. Univariate analyses indicated that the income groups
diered on three factors price, sensory appeal and familiarity, F(2,640)=311 to
904, p<005(Table5). An orderly relationship between incomeand theimportance
of pricein food selection was apparent, with less emphasis beingplaced on priceby
better-o individuals. Familiarity showed the reverse eect, being rated as more
important by lower incomegroups. Sensory appeal was rated as less important by
thelow-incomethan either themoderate- or high-incomegroups.
Tests of Convergent Validity
Scores on theshortened social desirability scalecorrelated with two of theFCQ
scales: health (r=019, p<0001) and natural content (r=016, p<0001). This factor
278 A. STEPTOE ET AL.
T:nir 5
Motives for food choicein relation to income
Scale Lowincome Mediumincome High income
Mean Standard Mean Standard Mean Standard
deviation deviation deviation
Health 282 073 296 067 271 073
Mood 213 075 213 072 202 072
Convenience 278 072 283 073 262 080
Sensory appeal 287 064
a
302 059
b
301 058
b
Natural content 235 086 264 082 242 086
Price 312 070
a
279 069
b
209 065
c
Weight control 230 088 242 082 227 083
Familiarity 183 070
a
179 068
b
164 070
c
Ethical concern 191 078 204 076 179 072
I n each row, cells sharing thesamesuperscript werenot signicantly dierent on post hoc tests.
T:nir 6
Valueof health and motives for food choice
Scale Lowhealth value High health value
Mean Standard Mean Standard
deviation deviation
Health 272 071 296 070
Mood 198 074 225 074
Sensory appeal 286 063 306 058
Natural content 231 082 261 086
Weight control 223 084 243 084
was thereforetaken into account when assessingrelationships with other measures.
I norder to test theconvergent validity of thescales, anumber of apriori predictions
weregenerated concerning associations with other questionnaires.
The Health as a Value measure was administered in both studies, with the
expectation that scores would correlate with the FCQ health score. Health value
scores averaged 446 in women and 423 in men, t=317, df=710, p<0005. The
associations with FCQ factors wereanalysed by dividingthepopulation by median
split into high and lowvalueof health sub-groups. Multivariateanalysisof variance
withhealthvaluesub-groupandsexasbetween-subject factorsandsocial desirability
as thecovariatewas then carried out. Therewas no signicant interaction between
health value and sex, but a main multivariate eect of health value was observed,
F(9,647)=527, p<0005. Univariate eects were signicant for the FCQ health,
mood, sensory appeal, natural content and weight control scales, F(1,647)=781 to
187, p<001 (Table6). As expected, respondents who placea high valueon health
had signicantly greater scores on theFCQ health scale. However, they also rated
mood, sensory appeal, natural content and weight control as moreimportant. The
279 MOTI VES UNDERLYI NG THE SELECTI ON OF FOOD
value of health was not related to the importance placed on convenience, price,
familiarity or ethical factors in determining thechoiceof food.
Sincepreoccupationwithweightcontrol iscentral todietaryrestraint, wepredicted
that the weight control factor would be correlated with the restraint scale of the
DEBQ. Restraint scores werelowamongmen (mean 219, SD 080), so analyses of
this factor wereconned to women. Usabledatawereavailablefrom214of the220
women in Study 1, and they weredivided by median split into thosewith low(mean
213, SD 050) and high (mean 353, SD 051) restraint scores. Multivariateanalysis
of theFCQ with ageand social desirability as covariates showed a signicant eect
of restraint groupoverall, F(9,189)=139, p<0001. Univariateeectsweresignicant
only for two scales. As predicted, FCQ weight control scores were higher in the
restrained than unrestrained women, mean 294, SD 064 vs. 212, SD 061, F(1,
197)=888, p<0001. I n addition, pricewasconsidered lesssignicant for high- than
for low-restrained women, mean 272, SD 079 vs. 294, SD 068, F(1,197)=469,
p<005. FCQ weight control ratings also correlated with DEBQ emotional eating
scoresamongwomen(r=024, p<0001). I t wasalso foundthat theFCQ moodscale
was positively correlated with both the emotional eating (r=038, p<0001) and
external eating scales of theDEBQ.
I n relation to locus of control, it was predicted that subjects with high internal
MHLOC scores would be more concerned with health and the use of natural
ingredients than those with less strong beliefs about personal responsibility for
health. These predictions were fullled for both women and men with signicant
correlationsbetweeninternal LOC scoresandFCQhealth(r=040and029, p<0001)
and natural content (r=037 and 016, p<005). Controlling for social desirability,
all correlationsin women remained signicant, asdid theassociationsbetween FCQ
health and internal LOC in men. However, thecorrelation in men between internal
LOC and FCQ natural content was no longer signicant after social desirability had
been taken into account.
Neuroticismas a personality disposition is associated with proneness to anxiety
and stress responses. I t was therefore predicted that neuroticism might correlate
positivelywiththeFCQ moodfactor. Theassociationwasnot signicant for women,
but was conrmed for men (r=020, p<001). The openness to experience factor
fromtheNEO was predicted to correlatenegatively with familiarity, and this eect
wasconrmedfor bothwomenandmen(r=033and025respectively, p<0001).
Theseeects remained signicant after controlling for social desirability biases.
DiscissioN
Our attempt to develop a brief questionnaire to assess perceived inuences on
food selection at the individual level identied nine distinct factors. Several of
the factors are similar to dimensions described by other investigators, including
healthfulness, tasteor sensoryappeal, price, convenience, andtraditionor familiarity
(Drenowski, 1992; Lau et al., 1984; Rappaport et al., 1992). Mood or aect and
concern with weight control havealso emerged in previouswork (Holliset al., 1986;
Williams et al., 1987). I n contrast, some potential inuences on food choice, such
as how lling or satisfying the food is and how much it is liked by family and
friends, did not emergeas consistent factors in theseanalyses. TheFCQ was shown
to have high internal consistency in both studies. The conrmatory factor analysis
280 A. STEPTOE ET AL.
suggested that the factors are robust, and adequate short-term stability has also
been established.
Sinceanumber of theFCQscaleswereintercorrelated, thepossibilityof asmaller
group of higher order factors being useful was explored. A three-factor solution
accounted for 58% of the variance, with the FCQ health, natural content, weight
control and ethical concern loading on factor 1, convenienceand priceon factor 2,
and mood, sensory appeal and familiarity on factor 3. However, wedo not favour
this approach for two reasons. Firstly, someindividual FCQ scales did not load on
single factors: mood and familiarity shared high loading on two or three factors.
Secondly, it may be more useful to be able to investigate a wider range of specic
motives related to food choice, rather than broad dimensions.
I n terms of individual scales, the health factor contains items related to the
prevention of chronic disease (e.g. high in bre and roughage) and to general
nutrition and well-being (e.g. nutritious). The preliminary questionnaire ad-
ministered in Study 1 contained several other items related to nutrition and health
(e.g. easy to digest, part of a balanced diet) that loaded on the health factor,
but lessstrongly than thesix itemsselected for thenal inventory. Thehealth factor
also included theitemgood for my skin/teeth/hair/nailsetc. Thisisconsistent with
evidencethat concern for appearancemay predict healthy dietary choices (Hayes &
Ross, 1987). I t is interesting that the itemlow in fat did not load on the health
but on the weight control factor. I t is possible that the association of dietary fat
with weight is a consequenceof thesamplecontaining a high proportion of young
adults, and that in a middle-aged group more conscious of cardiovascular disease
risk, fat restrictionwouldhavebeenlinkedwithhealthandchronicdiseaseprevention.
The sex dierence in ratings on the health scale indicates that women pay more
attention to this factor than do men. The result is consistent with other studies of
health-related behaviours and beliefs, which typically showhealthier dietary choices
and more positive attitudes towards the health benets of salt and fat restriction
and increased bre intake in women than men (Wardle & Steptoe, 1991). The
importance of health as a reported motive for food choice increased with age in
women but not men. Convergent validity for the health scale was provided by the
signicant andpositiveassociationswithhealthasavalueandinternal health-related
locus of control.
Themood scalecontains items related to general alertness and mood, as well as
to relaxation and stress control. The emergence of this factor suggests that mood
and stress may play a rolein determining not only thequantity of food consumed,
but also the selection of foodstus (Wardle, 1987a). Convergent validity for the
moodfactor wasevaluatedbyitsrelationshipwiththeemotional eatingandexternal
eatingscalesof theDEBQ. Theseeectswereseeninwomenbut not men, for whom
DEBQ scores were very low, suggesting that there may be sex dierences in the
relationshipbetweenaect-relatedfoodselectionanddietarydisinhibition(Grunberg
& Straub, 1992). Among men, the mood factor was associated with neuroticism,
implying that anxiety-proneindividuals may bemorelikely to beinuenced by the
desire to maintain emotional well-being through eating than are emotionally more
stablemen.
Theconveniencefactor includesitemsrelatedbothtothepurchaseandpreparation
of food, whilesensory appeal involves smell, tasteand appearance. Rappaport et al.
(1992) found that health motives werenegatively correlated with convenience, while
health and pleasure(sensory appeal) wereunrelated. Neither ndingwas conrmed
281 MOTI VES UNDERLYI NG THE SELECTI ON OF FOOD
in thisanalysis, sincehealth wasnot signicantly associated with convenience, while
health and sensory appeal showed asmall but reliablepositivecorrelation (Table2).
The discrepancy with earlier ndings may have resulted from the very dierent
measurement methods employed. I n the comparison of income groups, the low
income group rated sensory appeal as less important than did better o subjects.
Peoplewith less disposableincomemay not beableto taketasteinto consideration
as much as wealthier individuals, and may haveto set other priorities.
The natural content scale reected concern with the use of additives and the
selection of natural ingredients. The correlation between the health and natural
content factors was high (r=059 in Study 1 and r=063 in Study 2), suggesting a
strong association between the two. Nevertheless, it would appear that general
health-promotingaspectsof nutritionareperceivedasdistinct fromconcernsrelated
to toxins and theingestion of unnatural non-foods added for cosmetic reasons. I t
can be argued that additives and articial ingredients are frequently incorporated
intofoodsaspreservatives, andmaythereforehavebenecial propertiesinpreventing
consumptionof foodsthat havedecayed. I t wouldbeinterestingthereforetodiscover
whether respondents in cultures with a less jaundiced opinion of thefood industry
would viewnatural ingredients and theabsenceof additives so positively.
Priceis an obvious inuence on food choice. Thecost of food is a much more
important element inselectionamongpeoplewithlowincomescomparedwiththose
that arebetter o (Table5). Pricewas also rated as moreimportant amongwomen
than men. I n the U.K., women typically have responsibility for food shopping for
the household, so may be more aware of budgetary limitations than are men with
their morespontaneous pattern of food purchases. Another interesting observation
is that women showing dietary restraint were less inuenced by price than the
unrestrained. I t may bethat desireto eat lowcaloriefood outweighs considerations
of cost for restrained eaters.
I t was anticipated that weight control would emerge as a signicant factor in
foodchoiceinthelight of theextensiveresearchondietaryrestraint andtheprevalent
cultural preferencefor thin bodies. A signicant association was observed between
weight control and mood as factors inuencing food choice, and this is consistent
with previous research (Wardleet al., 1992). Thecorrelation of weight control with
natural content (r=031 in Study 1 and r=042 in Study 2) reects the fact that
manypeoplepractisingcaloricrestrictionfavour natural foodssuchasrawvegetables
over prepared dishes. As predicted, scores on the FCQ weight control scale were
higher in restrained than unrestrained women. They wereunrelated to income, but
werehigher among respondents who stated that they valued health highly.
The eighth factor to emerge in the factor analysis was labelled familiarity. I t
includeditemsconcerninghowimportant it isfor thepersonto eat their accustomed
diet, rather than beingadventurous in food choices. A positiveassociation between
familiarity and mood was observed, suggesting that peoplewhosedietary selection
is inuenced by the need to regulate stress responses also prefer familiar foods.
Familiarity was one of the few factors not to dier on average between men and
women. I t was, however, related to age, since it appears that older people are less
adventurous in their choices. Associations were also observed between familiarity
and income, with signicantly higher familiarity ratings among people with lower
incomes. I t may bethat asincomesincrease, peoplearelessbound to buy only food
they know about, and can aord to takegreater risks with food selection. For the
nancially less well o, theconsequences of an unfortunatechoicearemoresevere,
282 A. STEPTOE ET AL.
and people will be more likely to select what they know they like. Corroborative
evidence concerning the familiarity scale is provided by the negative correlations
withtheopennesstoexperiencefactor ontheNEOFive-Factor PersonalityI nventory.
High scores on this personality factor are thought to reect openness to new
experiences and broad interests, and might thereforeberelevant to adventurousness
in food choice.
Ethical concernemerged as an independent factor inuencingfood choice. I tems
related to environmental and political issues loaded on this factor. I t is notablethat
ethical concern was not correlated with social desirability scores at a statistically
acceptablelevel, so endorsing theethical concern items was not simply a reection
of presenting a set of motives that was presumed to be socially acceptable. I n the
present sample, ratingsof ethical concernincreasedwithage, andwerehigher among
women than men. Thissuggeststhat themalestudentswho constituted themajority
of theyounger men in thestudy population wereparticularly unaected by ethical
issues in relation to food choice.
Sensory appeal, health, convenienceand pricearethemost important factorson
average(Table4), with theveother factors being typically endorsed less strongly.
Health is certainly not more important than other factors on average, and this
supportstheargument that amultidimensional approach to motivesgoverningfood
choice is appropriate. The variation in the relative importance of dierent factors
for dierent segments of thepopulation may makeit possibleto createproles for
distinct groups. For example, price was the most important factor for the lowest
incomegroup, andsensory appeal for thebetter o (Table5). Appropriatestrategies
for health promotion may perhaps bedeveloped for sectors with dierent priorities.
I f, for instance, convenience takes precedence over health, then education and
information about healthy food that is also readily available and easy to prepare
might beof greater valuethan messages emphasizing health alone.
Thelimitations of this study must berecognized. Data wereonly availablefrom
the segment of the sample who returned the questionnaire, so may represent the
viewsof individualswithaninterest infoodselection. Thequestionnaireisconcerned
with thefactors that areperceived as relevant to food choice, and thesefactors do
not necessarily reect actual dietary selection behaviour. Thecultural limitations of
this approach to the investigation of food choice should also be recognized. The
nine factors that emerged in this study were endorsed by members of a society in
whichawiderangeof safeproductsarereadilyavailableandwell labelled. Awareness
of environmental issues is relatively high, and a substantial proportion of food is
importedsoissuessuchascountryof originaresalient. Consumersarenot restrained
by actual shortages, or by seasonal variations to the extent that might be the case
in rural, less auent or less developed societies. Dierent factors might assume
greater importance in other cultures, in societies that produce most of their own
food, or in populations exposed to an unpredictable food supply. Nevertheless,
within western urban populations, the FCQ provides the opportunity to assess a
broad rangeof factors perceived as relevant to food selection.
RrrrrNcrs
Bell, A. C., Stuart, A. M., Radford, A. J . & Cairney, P. T. (1981) A method for describing
food beliefs which may predict personal food choice. J ournal of NutritionEducation, 13,
2226.
283 MOTI VES UNDERLYI NG THE SELECTI ON OF FOOD
Bentler, P. M. (1989) EQS: Structural Equations Program Manual. Los Angeles: BMDP
Statistical SoftwareI nc.
Bentler, P. M. (1990) Comparative t indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin,
107, 238246.
Bentler, P. M. & Bonett, D. G. (1980) Signicancetests and goodness of t in theanalysis of
covariancestructures. Psychological Bulletin, 88, 588606.
Cannon, G. (1992) Food and Health: TheExperts Agree. London: Consumers Association.
Cockerham, W. C., Kunz, G. & Lueschen, G. (1988) On concern with appearance, health
beliefs, andeatinghabits: areappraisal comparingAmericansandWest Germans. J ournal
of Health and Social Behavior, 29, 265270.
Costa, P. T. & McCrae, R. R. (1991) NEO PI -R Professional Manual. Odessa, U.S.A.:
Psychological Assessment Resources I nc.
Costa, P. T. & McCrae, R. R. (1992) Bibliography for theRevisedNEO Personality I nventory
and NEO Five-Factor I nventory. Odessa, U.S.A.: Psychological Assessment Resources
I nc.
Drenowski, A. (1992) Nutritional perspectives on biobehavioral models of dietary change.
I n: K. K. DeRoos (Ed.), Promoting Dietary Changein Communities. Pp. 96112. Wash-
ington: Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center.
Fine, B. & Leopold, E. (1993) TheWorld of Consumption. London: Routledge.
Glanz, K., Kristal, A., Sorensen, G., Palombo, R., Heimendinger, J . & Probart, C. (1993)
Development and validation of measures of psychosocial factors inuencing fat- and
bre-related dietary behavior. PreventiveMedicine, 22, 373387.
Grunberg, N. E. & Straub, R. O. (1992) The roleof gender and tasteclass in the eects of
stress on eating. Health Psychology, 11, 97100.
Harmatz, M. G. & Kerr, B. B. (1981) Over-eatingbehaviour: amulti-causal approach. Obesity
and Metabolism, 1, 134139.
Hayes, D. & Ross, C. E. (1987) Concern with appearance, health beliefs, and eating habits.
J ournal of Health and Social Behavior, 28, 120130.
Healthy People2000 (1992) Boston: J ones and Bartlett.
Hollis, J . F., Carmody, T. P., Connor, S. L., Fey, S. G. & Matarazzo, J . D. (1986) The
Nutrition Attitudes Survey: associations with dietary habits, psychological and physical
well-being, and coronary risk factors. Health Psychology, 5, 359374.
Kristal, A. R., Bowen, D. J ., Curry, S. J ., Shattuck, A. L. & Henry, H. J . (1990) Nutrition
knowledge, attitudes, and perceived normsascorrelates of selectinglow-fat diets. Health
Education and Research, 5, 467477.
Krondl, L. & Lau, D. (1982) Social determinants in human food selection. I n: L. Barker
(Ed.), The Psychobiology of Human Food Selection. Pp. 139151. Chichester: Ellis
Horwood.
Lands, W. E. N., Hamazaki, T., Yamazaki, K., Okuyama, H., Sakai, K., Goto, Y. & Hubbard,
V. S. (1990) Changing dietary patterns. American J ournal of Clinical Nutrition, 51,
991993.
Lau, D., Krondl, M. & Coleman, P. (1984) Psychological factors aectingfood selection. I n:
J . Galler (Ed.), Nutrition and Behavior. Pp. 397415. NewYork: PlenumPress.
Lau, R. R., Hartman, K. A. & Ware, J . E. (1986) Health as a value: methodological and
theoretical considerations. Health Psychology, 5, 2543.
McCann, B., Warnick, G. & Knopp, R. (1990) Changes in plasma lipids and dietary intake
accompanying shifts in perceived workload and stress. Psychosomatic Medicine, 52,
97108.
McCann, B. S., Retzla, B. M., Dowdy, A. A., Walden, C. E. & Knopp, R. H. (1990)
Promoting adherence to low-fat low-cholesterol diets: review and recommendations.
J ournal of theAmerican Dietetic Association, 90, 14081414.
Marsh, H. W., Balla, J . R. & McDonald, R. P. (1988) Goodness-of-t indicesin conrmatory
factor analyses: theeects of samplesize. Psychological Bulletin, 103, 391410.
Michela, J . & Contento, I . (1986) Cognitive, motivational, social andenvironmental inuences
on childrens food choices. Health Psychology, 5, 209230.
Parraga, I . M. (1990) Determinants of food consumption. J ournal of the American Dietetic
Association, 90, 661663.
Polivy, J ., Herman, P. C. & Warsh, S. (1978) I nternal andexternal componentsof emotionality
in restrained and unrestrained eaters. J ournal of Abnormal Psychology, 87, 497504.
284 A. STEPTOE ET AL.
Rappaport, L., Peters, G., Hu-Corzine, L. & Downey, R. (1992) Reasons for eating: an
exploratory cognitiveanalysis. Ecology of Food and Nutrition, 28, 171189.
Rozin, P. (1984) The acquisition of food habits and preferences. I n: J . D. Matarazzo et al.
(Eds), Behavioral Health: A Handbook of Health Enhancement and Disease Prevention.
Pp. 590607. NewYork: Wiley-I nterscience.
TheHealth of theNation (1992) London: HMSO.
Sanjur, D. (Ed.) (1982) Social andCultural Perspectivesof Nutrition. EnglewoodClis: Prentice
Hall.
Smith, A. M. & Owen, N. (1992) Associations of social status and health-related beliefs with
dietary fat and bredensities. PreventiveMedicine, 21, 735745.
Strahan, R. & Gerbasi, K. C. (1972) Short, homogenous versions of the Marlowe-Crowne
social desirability scale. J ournal of Clinical Psychology, 28, 191193.
Stunkard, A. J . & Messick, S. (1985) Thethreefactor eatingquestionnaireto measuredietary
restraint, disinhibition and hunger. J ournal of Psychosomatic Research, 29, 7184.
Trenkner, L. L., Rooney, B., Viswanath, K., Baxter, J ., Elmer, P., Finnegan, J . R., Graves,
K., Hertog, J ., Mullis, R., Pirie, P. & Potter, J . (1990) Development of a scale using
nutrition attitudes for audiencesegmentation. Health Education Research, 5, 479487.
Trichopoulou, A. D. & Efstathiadis, P. P. (1989) Changes of nutrition patterns and health
indicators at thepopulation level in Greece. American J ournal of Clinical Nutrition, 49,
10421047.
Tuorila, H. & Pangborn, R. M. (1988) Prediction of reported consumption of selected fat-
containing foods. Appetite, 11, 8195.
Van Strien, T., Fritjers, J . E. R., Bergers, G. P. A. & Defares, P. B. (1986) Dutch eating
behaviour questionnaire for assessment of restrained, emotional and external eating
behaviour. I nternational J ournal of Eating Disorders, 5, 295315.
Wallston, D. S., Wallston, K. A. & DeVellis, R. (1978) Development of themultidimensional
health locus of control (MHLC) scales. Health Education Monographs, 6, 160170.
Wardle, J . (1986) The assessment of restrained eating. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 24,
213215.
Wardle, J . (1987a) Compulsive eating and dietary restraint. British J ournal of Clinical Psy-
chology, 26, 4755.
Wardle, J . (1987b) Eatingstyle: avalidationstudyof theDutchEatingBehaviour Questionnaire
in normal subjectsand women with eatingdisorders. J ournal of Psychosomatic Research,
31, 161169.
Wardle, J . (1993) Food choices and health evaluation. Psychology and Health, 8, 6575.
Wardle, J . & Steptoe, A. (1991) The European Health and Behaviour Survey: rationale,
methodsandresultsfromtheUnitedKingdom. Social ScienceandMedicine, 33, 925936.
Wardle, J ., Marsland, L., Sheikh, Y., Quinn, M., Fedoro, I . & Ogden, J . (1992) Eatingstyle
and eating behaviour in adolescents. Appetite, 18, 167183.
Williams, A., Spencer, C. P. & Edelman, R. J . (1987) Restraint theory, locus of control and
thesituational analysis of bingeeating. Personality and I ndividual Differences, 8, 6774.
Received 22 December 1994, revision 15 February 1995