Relationship between Presentation, Attitude, and In-Flight Meal Food Healthiness: Moderating Role of Familiarity
Abstract
1. Introduction
2. Literature Review and Hypothesis Development
2.1. Attitude
2.2. Food Presentation
2.3. Food Healthiness
2.4. Hypothesis Development
2.5. Familiarity
3. Method
3.1. Research Model
3.2. Illustration of Measurement Items
3.3. Data Collection and Analysis Procedure
4. Results
4.1. Profile of Survey Participants
4.2. Results of Exploratory Factor Analysis and Reliability Test
4.3. Correlation Matrix and Results of Hypothesis Testing
5. Discussion and Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Balcombe, K.; Fraser, I.; Harris, L. Consumer willingness to pay for in-flight service and comfort levels: A choice experiment. J. Air Transp. Manag. 2009, 15, 221–226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Messner, W. The impact of an aircraft’s service environment on perceptions of in-flight food quality. J. Air Transp. Manag. 2016, 53, 123–130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- O’Hara, L.; Strugnell, C. Developments in in-flight catering. Nutr. Food Sci. 1997, 97, 105–106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Han, H.; Moon, H.; Ariza-Montes, A.; Lee, S. Sensory/health-related and convenience/process quality of airline meals and traveler loyalty. Sustainability 2020, 12, 857. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Petrescu, D.C.; Vermeir, I.; Petrescu-Mag, R.M. Consumer understanding of food quality, healthiness, and environmental impact: A cross-national perspective. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Plasek, B.; Lakner, Z.; Temesi, Á. Factors that influence the perceived healthiness of food. Nutrients 2020, 12, 1881. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Grammatikopoulou, M.G.; Zakas, A.; Papadopoulou, S.K.; Panayiotoglou, A. The nutritional value and health issues of in-flight meals offered by Greek airlines—A preliminary study. J. Food. 2007, 18, 87–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hosni, H.; Periklis, D.; Baourakis, G. Consumers attitude towards healthy food: “organic and functional foods”. Int. J. Food Beverage Manuf. Bus. Models 2017, 2, 85–99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vera-Santander, V.E.; Hernández-Figueroa, R.H.; Jiménez-Munguía, M.T.; Mani-López, E.; López-Malo, A. Health benefits of consuming foods with bacterial probiotics, postbiotics, and their metabolites: A review. Molecules 2023, 28, 1230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, H.; Zhang, J.; Luximon, Y.; Qin, M.; Geng, P.; Tao, D. The determinants of user acceptance of mobile medical platforms: An investigation integrating the TPB, TAM, and patient-centered factors. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 10758. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhao, Z.; Xue, Y.; Geng, L.; Xu, Y.; Meline, N.N. The influence of environmental values on consumer intentions to participate in agritourism—A model to extend TPB. J. Agric. Environ. Ethics 2022, 35, 15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xie, X.; Huang, L.; Li, J.; Zhu, H. Generational differences in perceptions of food health/risk and attitudes toward organic food and game meat: The case of the COVID-19 crisis in China. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 3148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Naderer, B.; Binder, A.; Matthes, J.; Spielvogel, I.; Forrai, M. Food as an eye-catcher. An eye-tracking study on Children’s attention to healthy and unhealthy food presentations as well as non-edible objects in audiovisual media. Pediatr. Obes. 2020, 15, e12591. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Verma, P. The effect of presentation, product availability and ease upon transaction reliability for online food delivery aggregator applications—Moderated mediated model. J. Foodserv. Bus. Res. 2020, 23, 285–304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Namkung, Y.; Jang, S. Are highly satisfied restaurant customers really different? A quality perception perspective. Int. J. Contemp. Hosp. Manag. 2008, 20, 142–155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Buhrau, D.; Ozturk, T.C. Motivating healthy eating: The role of presentation format and health consciousness. Food Qual. Prefer. 2018, 64, 167–171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chan, E.; Zhang, L.S. Is this food healthy? The impact of lay beliefs and contextual cues on food healthiness perception and consumption. Curr. Opin. Psychol. 2022, 46, 101348. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hagen, L. Pretty healthy food: How and when aesthetics enhance perceived healthiness. J. Mark. 2021, 85, 129–145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, R.; Zhou, X.; Li, B. Pricing strategy of dual-channel supply chain with a risk-averse retailer considering consumers’ channel preferences. Ann. Oper. Res. 2022, 309, 305–324. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bunz, U.; Seibert, J.; Hendrickse, J. From TAM to AVRTS: Development and validation of the attitudes toward Virtual Reality Technology Scale. Virtual Real. 2021, 25, 31–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wong, G.Z.; Wong, K.H.; Lau, T.C.; Lee, J.H.; Kok, Y.H. Study of intention to use renewable energy technology in Malaysia using TAM and TPB. Renew. Energy 2024, 221, 119787. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Natasia, S.R.; Wiranti, Y.T.; Parastika, A. Acceptance analysis of NUADU as e-learning platform using the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) approach. Procedia Comput. Sci. 2022, 197, 512–520. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Loera, B.; Murphy, B.; Fedi, A.; Martini, M.; Tecco, N.; Dean, M. Understanding the purchase intentions for organic vegetables across EU: A proposal to extend the TPB model. Br. Food J. 2022, 124, 4736–4754. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gansser, O.A.; Reich, C.S. Influence of the new ecological paradigm (NEP) and environmental concerns on pro-environmental behavioral intention based on the theory of planned behavior (TPB). J. Clean. Prod. 2023, 382, 134629. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liao, C.; Huang, Y.; Zheng, Z.; Xu, Y. Investigating the factors influencing urban residents’ low-carbon travel intention: A comprehensive analysis based on the TPB model. Transp. Res. Interdiscip. Perspect. 2023, 22, 100948. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Baiano, A. 3D printed foods: A comprehensive review on technologies, nutritional value, safety, consumer attitude, regulatory framework, and economic and sustainability issues. Food Rev. Int. 2022, 38, 986–1016. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Desye, B.; Tesfaye, A.H.; Daba, C.; Berihun, G. Food safety knowledge, attitude, and practice of street food vendors and associated factors in low-and middle-income countries: A Systematic review and Meta-analysis. PLoS ONE 2023, 18, e0287996. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Roy, A.; Ghosh, A.; Vashisht, D. The consumer perception and purchasing attitude towards organic food: A critical review. Nutr. Food Sci. 2023, 53, 578–599. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hussain, K.; Abbasi, A.Z.; Rasoolimanesh, S.M.; Schultz, C.D.; Ting, D.H.; Ali, F. Local food consumption values and attitude formation: The moderating effect of food neophilia and neophobia. J. Hosp. Tour. Insights 2023, 6, 464–491. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hallez, L.; Vansteenbeeck, H.; Boen, F.; Smits, T. Persuasive packaging? The impact of packaging color and claims on young consumers’ perceptions of product healthiness, sustainability and tastiness. Appetite 2023, 182, 106433. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rana, J.; Paul, J. Health motive and the purchase of organic food: A meta-analytic review. Int. J. Consum. Stud. 2020, 44, 162–171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Amar, M.; Gvili, Y.; Tal, A. Moving towards healthy: Cuing food healthiness and appeal. J. Soc. Mark. 2021, 11, 44–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, S.; Lee, N.; Dockter, C.E. Effects of message presentation type on gm food risk perception, similarity judgment, and attitude. Health. Commun. 2021, 36, 1666–1676. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Jang, S.S.; Ha, J.; Park, K. Effects of ethnic authenticity: Investigating Korean restaurant customers in the US. Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 2012, 31, 990–1003. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chousou, C.; Mattas, K. Assessing consumer attitudes and perceptions towards food authenticity. Br. Food J. 2021, 123, 1947–1961. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gunden, N.; Morosan, C.; DeFranco, A. Are online food delivery systems persuasive? The impact of pictures and calorie information on consumer behavior. J. Hosp. Tour. Ins. 2021, 4, 457–472. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Åstr⊘ sm, A.N.; Rise, J. Young adults’ intention to eat healthy food: Extending the theory of planned behaviour. Psychol. Health 2001, 16, 223–237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cuesta-Valiño, P.; Rodríguez, P.G.; Núñez-Barriopedro, E. Perception of advertisements for healthy food on social media: Effect of attitude on consumers’ response. Int. J. Env. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 6463. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Nystrand, B.T.; Olsen, S.O. Consumers’ attitudes and intentions toward consuming functional foods in Norway. Food Qual. Pref. 2020, 80, 103827. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Govaerts, F.; Olsen, S.O. Consumers’ values, attitudes and behaviours towards consuming seaweed food products: The effects of perceived naturalness, uniqueness, and behavioural control. Food Res. Int. 2023, 165, 112417. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Im, J.; Kim, J.; Choeh, J.Y. COVID-19, social distancing, and risk-averse actions of hospitality and tourism consumers: A case of South Korea. J. Destin. Mark. Manag. 2021, 20, 100566. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lin, W.T.; Chen, G.; Li, C. Risk-averse energy trading among peer-to-peer based virtual power plants: A stochastic game approach. Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst. 2021, 132, 107145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tuorila, H.; Hartmann, C. Consumer responses to novel and unfamiliar foods. Curr. Opin. Food Sci. 2020, 33, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jang, S.S.; Kim, D. Enhancing ethnic food acceptance and reducing perceived risk: The effects of personality traits, cultural familiarity, and menu framing. Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 2015, 47, 85–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Losasso, C.; Cibin, V.; Cappa, V.; Lo, Y.T.; Chang, Y.H.; Lee, M.S.; Wahlqvist, M.L. Health and nutrition economics: Diet costs are associated with diet quality. Asia Pac. J. Clin. Nutr. 2009, 18, 598–604. [Google Scholar]
- French, S.A.; Tangney, C.C.; Crane, M.M.; Wang, Y.; Appelhans, B. Nutrition quality of food purchases varies by household income: The SHoPPER study. BMC Public Health 2019, 19, 231. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Lin, H.C.; Wang, E. Effects of presentation of ingredient information with clean labels on older adults’ food product evaluation. Curr. Psychol. 2023, 42, 18515–18523. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Szocs, C.; Lefebvre, S. Spread or stacked? Vertical versus horizontal food presentation, portion size perceptions, and consumption. J. Bus. Res. 2017, 75, 249–257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Juliá-Sanchis, R.; Sanjuan-Quiles, A.; Richart-Martínez, M.; Cabrero-García, J. The impact of volunteering in mental health settings on nursing students’ attitudes. Nurse Educ. Pract. 2020, 44, 102726. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Spatola, N.; Wudarczyk, O.A. Implicit attitudes towards robots predict explicit attitudes, semantic distance between robots and humans, anthropomorphism, and prosocial behavior: From attitudes to human–robot interaction. Int. J. Soc. Robot. 2021, 13, 1149–1159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kremer, P.; Feurer, S.; Kim, J.Y.; Hoeffler, S. Overcoming the negative role of nostalgia in consumer reactions to automated products. J. Prod. Innov. Manag. 2022, 39, 871–890. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Racat, M.; Plotkina, D. Sensory-enabling technology in m-commerce: The effect of haptic stimulation on consumer purchasing behavior. Int. J. Electron. Commer. 2023, 27, 354–384. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hair, J.; Anderson, R.; Babin, B.; Black, W. Multivariate Data Analysis: A Global Perspective (Vol. 7); Upper Saddle River: New Jersey, NJ, USA, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Hayes, A.F. PROCESS: A Versatile Computational Tool for Observed Variable Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Modeling. 2012. Available online: http://www.afhayes.com/public/process2012.pdf (accessed on 25 January 2024).
Item | Frequency | Percentage |
---|---|---|
Male | 61 | 19.2 |
Female | 256 | 80.8 |
20s | 80 | 25.2 |
30s | 127 | 40.1 |
40s | 83 | 26.2 |
50s | 21 | 6.6 |
Older than 60 | 6 | 1.9 |
Monthly household income | ||
Under USD 2500 | 55 | 17.4 |
USD 2500 to 4999 | 93 | 29.3 |
USD 5000 to 7499 | 65 | 20.5 |
USD 7500 to 9999 | 36 | 11.4 |
Over USD 10,000 | 68 | 21.5 |
Annual usage frequency | ||
Less than 1 time | 38 | 12.0 |
1~2 times | 184 | 58.0 |
3~5 times | 69 | 21.8 |
More than 5 times | 26 | 8.2 |
Attribute (Cronbach’s α) | Measurement Item | Loading | Eigen Value (VE(%)) |
---|---|---|---|
Presentation (0.929) | The presentation of the in-flight meal was organized. | 0.838 | 7.767 (48.541) |
The presentation of the in-flight meal looked good. | 0.788 | ||
The presentation of the in-flight meal was neat. | 0.869 | ||
The presentation of the in-flight meal was nice. | 0.799 | ||
Attitude (0.927) | For me, the in-flight meal was (negative–positive) | 0.841 | 2.021 (12.630) |
For me, the in-flight meal was (bad–good) | 0.833 | ||
For me, the in-flight meal was (unfavorable–favorable) | 0.843 | ||
For me, the in-flight meal was (useless–useful) | 0.745 | ||
Food healthiness (0.903) | The in-flight meal was nutritious. | 0.744 | 1.300 (8.123) |
The in-flight meal’s nutrition promoted my health condition. | 0.822 | ||
The nutritional value of the in-flight meal was adequate. | 0.720 | ||
The in-flight meal`s nutrition was excellent. | 0.774 | ||
Familiarity (0.765) | I was familiar with the in-flight meal. | 0.819 | 1.163 (7.271) |
The in-flight meal was food that I frequently eat. | 0.793 | ||
I was accustomed to the in-flight meal. | 0.823 | ||
The in-flight meal was not unfamiliar with me. | 0.566 |
Variable | Mean | SD | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. Attitude | 3.479 | 1.049 | 1 | |||
2. Food healthiness | 3.033 | 0.942 | 0.632 * | 1 | ||
3. Presentation | 3.583 | 0.940 | 0.613 * | 0.639 * | 1 | |
4. Familiarity | 3.258 | 0.974 | 0.317 * | 0.343 * | 0.265 * | 1 |
Model 1 Food Healthiness | Model 2 Attitude | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
β | t Value | β | t Value | |
Constant | 1.352 | 2.93 * | 0.695 | 3.97 * |
Presentation | 0.296 | 2.29 * | 0.393 | 6.61 * |
Familiarity | −0.156 | −1.07 | ||
Interaction | 0.094 | 2.41 * | ||
Food healthiness | 0.453 | 7.64 * | ||
F value | 85.80 * | 141.04 * | ||
R2 | 0.4513 | 0.4732 | ||
Conditional effect of focal predictor | ||||
Familiarity | ||||
2.25 | 0.231 | 9.28 * | ||
3.25 | 0.273 | 13.77 * | ||
4.25 | 0.316 | 11.20 * | ||
Index of mediated moderation | Index | LLCI | ULCI | |
0.0429 * | 0.0042 | 0.0853 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Jang, R.; Lee, W.S.; Moon, J. Relationship between Presentation, Attitude, and In-Flight Meal Food Healthiness: Moderating Role of Familiarity. Foods 2024, 13, 2111. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods13132111
Jang R, Lee WS, Moon J. Relationship between Presentation, Attitude, and In-Flight Meal Food Healthiness: Moderating Role of Familiarity. Foods. 2024; 13(13):2111. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods13132111
Chicago/Turabian StyleJang, Ryeojin, Won Seok Lee, and Joonho Moon. 2024. "Relationship between Presentation, Attitude, and In-Flight Meal Food Healthiness: Moderating Role of Familiarity" Foods 13, no. 13: 2111. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods13132111
APA StyleJang, R., Lee, W. S., & Moon, J. (2024). Relationship between Presentation, Attitude, and In-Flight Meal Food Healthiness: Moderating Role of Familiarity. Foods, 13(13), 2111. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods13132111