See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/288574656

Fast food consumption habits of university students

Article  in  Journal of Food Agriculture and Environment · January 2013

CITATIONS READS

5 13,468

2 authors, including:

Ebru Onurlubaş
Trakya University
79 PUBLICATIONS   116 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

ALCOHOL CONSUMPTION View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Ebru Onurlubaş on 30 March 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 WFL Publisher
Science and Technology

Meri-Rastilantie 3 B, FI-00980 Journal of Food, Agriculture & Environment Vol.11 (3&4): 12-14 2013 www.world-food.net
Helsinki, Finland
e-mail: info@world-food.net

Fast food consumption habits of university students

Ebru Onurlubaş * and Neslihan Yılmaz

Department of Intenational Trade, Keşan Yusuf Çapraz School of Applied Siciences, Trakya University, Edirne/Keşan, Turkey.
*e-mail: ebruonurlubas@hotmail.com.tr

Received 16 July 2013, accepted 8 October 2013.

Abstract
This work is based on data obtained from the face to face surveys with 265 students at Trakya University Keşan Yusuf Çapraz School of Applied
Sciences. A survey has been conducted in order to identify the fast food consuming habits of university students. It has been found out that 97.4%
of the students consume fast food type nutrition and 2.6% of the students do not consume this type of food. Factor analysis has been applied to the
survey in order to determine Fast food consumption reasons. With this analysis the explanatory factors in their preference of fast food products have
been grouped. The most distinctive factors have been named as “Product-Quality-Price relation”, “Correctitude of Location”, Product and Service”,
and “Scarcity of Time”.

Key words: Fast-food consumption, student habits, student preference, factor analysis.

Introduction Materials and Methods

Nutrition is using each of energy and nutrition elements in the
most economical way in sufficient amount necessary for growth,
development and a healthy and efficient life, without losing their
nutritional value and rendering them unhealthy 14.
Type of nutrition of our age differs in comparison to the past.
Nutritional habits of societies are considered to be depending on
socio-economic, cultural, environmental, demographic and
psychographic factors 11. Personal lifestyle affects consumption
behaviours, namely, decisions on how to spend time, energy and
money 4, 9. Scarcity of time arose in connection with technological
improvements, urbanization and women’s participation in
workforce, intensive work hours, single living and joining of women
to social and economic life has increased the demand for fast
food 1. Fast food consumption becomes the new and fast option
for eating within brief noon hours in urban life 6. Eating out removes
hunger and provides pleasure, entertainment, time saving, social
activity and psychological assistance 10.
Fast food nutrition which is considered an activity among
children and youngsters and rapidly becomes a popular habit
contains either insufficient or excessive nutrition elements. It
consequently causes chronic diseases such as obesity, diabetes,
cardio-vascular diseases and cancer 12.
This study includes a research on fast food consumption habits
of university students, preference grounds and comments thereof.
This survey is of a great significance in respect to specification
of fast food consumption habits, preference grounds and target
consumption based on the said habits and making of policies of
companies operating in the food industry.
The main material of the study is the data obtained from
questionnaire conducted at Trakya University Keşan Yusuf Çapraz
School of Applied Sciences. There are 1098 students in the
university in total. The questionnaire has been applied to 265
students randomly selected from 1098 students.
The participant students were asked various questions in order
to specify their reasons of fast food consumption. The answers
given to these questions were subjected to factor analysis and
summarized through SPSS packaged software. In the first instance,
the number of factors to explain fast food comsumption preferences
was determined. Then, the variables of which the factors are
comprised were specified using Varimax rotation solution. Kaiser-
Meyer-Olkin (KMO) measure and Bartlett sphericity test were
applied in order to test the compatibility of the explanatory
variables to be taken into consideration in the research to the
application of the factor analysis. At the beginning solution of
factor analysis, eigen values used to determine the number of the
factors (principal components), variance and cumulative variance
were calculated. In respect to the results of this calculation, factors
whose eigen value was under one were not taken into
consideration.
Results
It was observed that 55.1% of the university students participating
to the questionnaire were male and 44.9% female. Average age of
the students was 20.75 years. Of the students 6.8% were married
while 93.2% were single. It was noted that, in respect to the division
of the students over the sections of the School of Applied Sciences,
21.9% of the students study computer technology, 18.1% business
data management, 14.7% international trade, 23% customs
management and 22.3% banking and insurance. In respect to

12 Journal of Food, Agriculture & Environment, Vol.11 (3&4), July-October 2013

geographical regions, it was found that 46.4% of the students Table 1. KMO and Bartlett results.
came from Marmara Region, 20% from Aegean Region, 10.9% from Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. 0.577
Mediterranean, 5.7% from Black Sea Region, 10.9% from Inner Approx. Chi-Square 154.465
Anatolia Region, 4.2% from East Anatolia Region and 1.9% from Bartlett's Test of Sphericity Df 55
Sig. 0.000
Southeastern Anatolia Region. Of the families of the students
32.5% resided in metropolises, 34.7% in provinces, 24.9% in
counties, 6.8% in villages, and 1.1% in townships. Table 2. Mark assessment scale, variance explanation.
Of the participants 55.1% lived at home, 42.6% in dormitories Beginning eigenvalues Total load factor (Rotated)
and 2.3% with their families. It was found that 97.4% of the Factor Total
Explained
Cumulative Total
Explained
Cumulative
Variance % Variance %
students consumed fast food while 2.6% thereof did not.
1 1.855 16.865 16.865 1.819 16.534 16.534
Of the students 12.8% had 250 TL or less, 49.4% 251-500 TL, 2 1.339 12.176 29.041 1.231 11.195 27.729
32.1% 501-750 TL, 4.5% 751-1001 TL and 1.2% 1001-2000 TL on a 3 1.176 10.695 39.736 1.229 11.169 38.898
monthly basis. The maximum amount stated to be earned by 32.8% 4 1.125 10.223 49.959 1.217 11.061 49.959
of the students’ families was 1001-1500 TL on a monthly basis. Of
the fathers of the students 68.7% had a job, and 12.8% of the
found that fast food is preferred due to its hygiene, quality and
mothers and 15.8% of both mothers and fathers and 2.3% of the
price. In another survey, it has been found that the most important
siblings of the students had a job. Further, working family members
factor affecting preference of the students of fast food
such as grandfathers and aunts shared a rate of 0.4%.
consumption spot is cleanliness 8.
Among the fast food products, hamburger was the first to come
Factor 2 (Table 3) determined in evaluation of the students’
to mind by 76.2%. Pizza followed by 7.5%, toasted sandwich by
preference of fast food consumption is the “convenience of
6.4%, biscuits by 4.2%, chips by 3.4%, sandwich by 1.5% and roll
accessibility” and it explains 11.195% of the variance. Factor 2
by 0.8%. Most consumed fast food products were respectively as
includes components such as availability of car parking lot and
follows: hamburger 82.3%, toasted sandwich 78.9%, pizza 67.5%,
good looking of the place. It has been concluded that factors
roll 49.8%, sandwich 41.9% and frozen food products 36.6%.
such as decoration, atmosphere, food quality, accessibility, service
Elmacıoğlu 6 has stated in 1996 that 11% of the fast food consumers
speed, menu variety and availability of special products play a
prefer hamburger, 10% döner, 8.7% meatballs and 8.1% French
significant role in respect to the preference of youngsters of fast
fries.
food restaurants 2.
Of the participants of the survey 91.7% considered fast food
Factor 3 (Table 3) is named as “product and service”. It explains
products unhealthy while 8.3% of the participants thought they
11.169% of the variance. The students indicated that they prefer
are healthy. When the harmful effects of the fast food products
fast food products, because they fit with their palatal delight, are
were asked, 80.8% of the participants stated that the fast food
prepared in healthy conditions, services thereof are pleasant and
products might cause obesity, 72.8% that the same might cause
the related complaints are being taken into consideration.
cardio-vascular diseases and 57.7% that it might cause bad
Factor 4 (Table 3) is named as “scarcity of time”. It explains
cholesterol.
11.061% of the variance. Factor 4 consists of components such as
Of the fast food consuming students 67.2% consumed fast food
time saving character of preparation of fast food and scarcity of
at noon, 1.1% in morning and 31.7% in the evenings. Of students
time due to work life. In another survey, it has been pointed out
15.1% went to the fast food restaurants daily, 19.6% once a week,
that the reason why fast food is the first preference of the students
31.7% twice a week, 17.7% thrice a week, 10.6% once in every two
is that the fast food does not require much time due to easy
weeks and 5.3% once a month. Hertzler and Frary 7 found in a
preparation and consumption. In other words, the first reason of
research conducted to determine the nutrition conditions and
preference is time 3, 13.
eating habits of the university students that male students
prefer fast food restaurants more than female students do.
They found that 11% of the students eat several times a
Table 3. Factor loads for fast food consumption preference scale.
year at fast food restaurants, 35% once or twice a month,
38% several times a week and 7% several times a day. Subgroup Subgroup Subgroup Subgroup
Factor analysis has been applied to test whether or not 1 2 3 4
the 11 variables asked gather under certain factors in order Factor 1 Food hygiene .538
to examine the construct validity for the reasons of fast Quality of the food .591
food consumption. First, Kaiser- Meyer- Olkin (KMO) and Reasonable prices .715
Bartlett sphericity tests were applied in order to test whether Factor 2 Availability of parking lots .612
or not the factor analysis results are useful and applicable Good looking of the place .705
and the data is compatible for the application of the factor Factor 3 Proper to palatal delight .759
fnalysis. Kaiser- Meyer- Olkin (KMO) value is 0.577 (Table Preparation of foods
.605
1) . The sig value is 0.00 for the result of Bartlett sphericity in healthy conditions
test. Thus, the data used for both values are compatible Service quality .442
for factor analysis. Factors (Table 2) which are formed with Evaluation of complaints .196
regard to the factor analysis results consist of values Factor 4 Saving time as preparation
.425
of food does not take much time
shown. Factor 1 (Table 3) is identified as “product-quality-
Working at office .766
price relation”. It explains 16.534% of the variance. It was

Journal of Food, Agriculture & Environment, Vol.11 (3&4), July-October 2013 13

 Akbay et al. 1 stated that the fast food is generally preferred by Singapore: An exploratory investigation using Barker’s model. Journal
children and youngsters and it is produced with little time of Foodservice Business Research 5(1):79-99.
consumption and is an convenience for employees.
12
Sağlam, F. 1991. Hızlı hazır yemek yeme üzerinde bir çalışma. Beslenme
ve Diyet Dergisi 20:187-197.
13
Stank, T. P., Goldby, T. J. and Vickery, S. K. 1999. Effect of service
Conclusions
supplier performance on satisfaction and loyalty of store managers in
Eating habits have changed today due to technological the fast food industry. Journal of Operation Management 17:429-447.
improvements and changes in life condition, participation of 14
Tanır, F., Şaşmaz, T., Beyhan, Y. and Bilici, S. 2001. Doğankent
women in work life and scarcity of time for office workers. Scarcity Beldesinde Bir Tekstil Fabrikasında Çalışanların Beslenme Durumu.
of time has increased the demand for fast food. Türk Tabipler Birliği Mesleki Sağlık ve Güvenlik Dergisi, Temmuz,
It has been noticed that there are not many researches on fast pp. 22-25.
food consumption of the students in Turkey. This study is
significant due to being among first researches about fast food
consumption in Turkey. Furthermore, it is significant due to being
the first survey about the fast food consumption habits of the
university students in the county.
It has been found in the survey that hamburger is the first in
fast food products to come to mind. Of the students 97.4%
continued to consume fast food although they know the harms
thereof. An awareness of fast food must be raised among the
students through educational activities.
Four factors were found which specify the fast food preferences
of the students and explains 49.959% of the variance, by rendering
factor analysis. Four significant factors explaining the difference
in the variance have been identified as, in sequence; “product-
quality price relation”, “convenience of accessibility”, “product
and service” and “scarcity of time”.
This survey constitutes an instruction for determination of the
policies of companies operating in the food industry in respect to
specification of fast food consumption habits, preference grounds
and target consumption based on the said habits.

References
1
Akbay, C., Tiryaki, G. Y. and Gul, A. 2007. Consumer characteristics
influencing fast food consumption in Turkey. Food Control 18:904–
913.
2
Bayraktar, M., Babekoğlu, Y. and Salman, M. 1995. Tüketicilerin Fast
Food Restoran Tercihlerini Etkileyen Faktörler. Ankara Üniversitesi
Ziraat Fakültesi Yayın No. 1400. Bilimsel Araştırma ve Incelemeler:
780. Ankara.
3
Brady, K. M., Robertson, C. J. and Cronin, J. J. 2001. Managing
behavioral intentions in diverse cultural environments: An investigation
of service quality, service value and satisfaction for American and
Ecuadorian fast Food customers. Journal of International Management
7:129-149.
4
Cravens, D. W., Hills, G. E. and Woodruff, R. B. 1987. Marketing
Management. Irwin, Illinois.
5
Elmacıoğlu, F. 1996. Hazır Yemek Sisteminde (Fast food) Önceliklerin
belirlenmesi. Beslenme ve Diyet dergisi, 25(1):30-34.
6
Hanson, R. 2002. Turkey HRI Food Service Sector Report 2002. USDA
Foreign Agricultural Service Gain Report#TU2012. Available from
www. fas.usda.gov.
7
Hertzler, A. A. and Frary, R. 1992. Dietary status and eating out practices
of college students. J. Am. Diet.-Assoc. 92(7):867-869.
8
Knutson, B. J. 2000. College Students and Fast Food. Cornell Hotel and
Restaurant Administration Quarterly 41(3):68-74.
9
Mentzer, J. T. and Schwartz, D. J. 1985. Marketing Today. 4th edn.
Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, San Diego.
10
Park, C. 2004. Efficient or enjoyable? Consumer values of eating-out
and fast restaurant consumption in Korea. International Journal of
Hospitality Management 23:87–94.
11
Sadi, M. A. 2002. Restaurant patronage and the ethnic groups in

14 Journal of Food, Agriculture & Environment, Vol.11 (3&4), July-October 2013

View publication stats