Next Article in Journal
An Appetite for Modernizing the Regulatory Framework for Protein Content Claims in Canada
Next Article in Special Issue
The Development of a Chinese Healthy Eating Index and Its Application in the General Population
Previous Article in Journal
Nypa fruticans Wurmb. Vinegar’s Aqueous Extract Stimulates Insulin Secretion and Exerts Hepatoprotective Effect on STZ-Induced Diabetic Rats
Previous Article in Special Issue
Exploring Diet Quality between Urban and Rural Dwelling Women of Reproductive Age
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Nutrients
Volume 9
Issue 9
10.3390/nu9090923
nutrients-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Consumption of a High Quantity and a Wide Variety of Vegetables Are Predicted by Different Food Choice Motives in Older Adults from France, Italy and the UK

by
Katherine M. Appleton
1,*,
Caterina Dinnella
2,
Sara Spinelli
2,
David Morizet
3,
Laure Saulais
4,
Ann Hemingway
5,
Erminio Monteleone
2,
Laurence Depezay
3,
Federico J. A. Perez-Cueto
6 and
Heather Hartwell
7
1
Research Centre for Behaviour Change, Department of Psychology, Faculty of Science and Technology, Bournemouth University, Poole BH12 5BB, UK
2
Dipartimento di Gestione Sistemi Agrari, Alimentari e Forestali, Universita degli Studi di Firenze, 50144 Florence, Italy
3
Food and Behaviours Department, Bonduelle, 59653 Villeneuve D’Ascq, France
4
Centre de Recherche, Institut Paul Bocuse, 69131 Ecully, France
5
Faculty of Health and Social Sciences, Bournemouth University, Poole BH12 5BB, UK
6
Department of Food Science, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen 1958 Frederiksberg C, Denmark
7
Faculty of Management, Bournemouth University, Poole BH12 5BB, UK
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Nutrients 2017, 9(9), 923; https://doi.org/10.3390/nu9090923
Submission received: 26 June 2017 / Revised: 10 August 2017 / Accepted: 17 August 2017 / Published: 23 August 2017
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Dietary Patterns, Diet Quality and Human Health)
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Background: Consumption of a high quantity and wide variety of vegetables is currently recommended for health. Dietary variety can be low, however, particularly for older adults. This study investigated the affective factors associated with the quantity and variety of vegetables consumed by older adults in France, Italy and the UK. Methods: Adults aged 65 years plus completed questionnaires on self-reported vegetable intake (quantity and variety), liking for vegetables, attitudes towards intake, and demographic variables. Results: In 497 older adults (France, n = 187, Italy, n = 152, UK, n = 158), higher quantities of vegetables consumed were associated with a higher age, affluence score and liking for vegetables, and a lower importance in consumption of familiarity (smallest β = 0.11, p = 0.03). Greater variety was associated with a higher liking and importance of health benefits, and a lower importance of familiarity (smallest β = −0.11, p < 0.01). Higher quantity and variety combined (quantity × variety) was associated with a higher age, liking and importance of health benefits, and a lower importance of familiarity (smallest β = 0.14, p = 0.02). Country-specific effects were also found (smallest β = 0.20, p < 0.01). Conclusions: These findings demonstrate a role for liking and a lower concern for eating familiar foods in vegetable consumption, and a particular role for concern for health benefits in the consumption of a greater variety of vegetables.

1. Introduction

Vegetable consumption is fundamental to good health. A high vegetable consumption has been associated with reduced risk of a number of non-communicable health conditions of major societal impact including cardiovascular disease [1,2], stroke [1,3], type 2 diabetes [4,5], some cancers [1,3,6,7,8], and dementia and cognitive decline [9,10]. Vegetables, furthermore, are a heterogeneous food group, and different vegetables are known to provide different micronutrients of benefit to health [11,12,13]. High intakes of dark green leafy vegetables have been associated with reduced risk for type 2 diabetes [14,15,16], reduced risk for a number of cancers [6,7,17], and with reduced depression [18]. High intakes of cruciferous vegetables, of β-carotene-rich vegetables, yellow- and red-pigmented vegetables, and of fruiting vegetables have been associated with reduced risk from various cancers [6,7,8,17,19,20,21,22], and root vegetable consumption has been associated with reduced type 2 diabetes risk [5]. For a range of health benefits, consumption of an adequate quantity and wide variety of vegetables on a regular basis is recommended [23,24].
Consumption of an adequate quantity and wide variety of vegetables on a regular basis, however, in adult populations across Europe and the US is low [25,26]. While World Health Organization guidelines recommend consumption of at least 160–240 g or 2–3 portions of vegetables/day [23,24], current population records estimate consumption of 74 g (Sweden)–383 g (Romania) vegetables/day across Europe with a mean of 160 g/day, and an additional 6 g (Austria)–41 g (France) and mean 14 g legumes, nuts and seeds/day [25].
Low vegetable consumption in adults has been associated with a number of individual factors. Low consumption is more common in persons of a lower education [27,28,29,30], a lower income [31,32], and a lower social-economic status [27,31,33]. More specific to each individual, high vegetable consumption has been associated with greater liking for the taste of vegetables [34,35,36], greater nutritional knowledge [37,38] and a greater appreciation of health and the value of a healthy diet [37]. High vegetable consumption has also been associated with greater availability of vegetables [35,36], greater familiarity and experience of vegetables [36,38], greater culinary knowledge and culinary confidence [30,34,37,38,39], and with several eating practices including usual consumption of meals as opposed to snacks [29,36], increased time and willingness to prepare and cook home-made meals [35,38,40], and the serving of courses within a meal, vegetable-only courses and larger portions of vegetables [41].
Many of these factors impact on the quantity and variety of vegetables consumed, but in many studies, quantity and variety of vegetables consumed are considered simultaneously or the importance of variety is not considered. Given the differing health benefits from differing vegetables, variety in vegetable consumption is important [11,12,13], and for some individuals, dietary variety can be low.
Older individuals (aged 65 years plus) as a population group can have low dietary variety, or can report an unwillingness to consume certain foods, largely as a result of changes in sensory and gastro-intestinal abilities, increasing disabilities, increased medical conditions and medication usage, and reduced social and economic circumstances [30,33,34,42,43,44,45,46,47]. These factors can limit food shopping, preparation and consumption [30,33,34,42,43,44,45,46,47], and due to their perishable and bulky nature and their fibrous texture and need for cooking, vegetable consumption may be particularly susceptible to these changes in abilities and circumstances [30,33,34,42,43,44,45,46,47].
While abilities and circumstances may deteriorate with age, many of the affective factors associated with vegetable consumption mentioned for adults, such as liking and attitudes, are likely to remain with age and may still apply. Studies considering older peoples’ liking and attitudes towards fruits and vegetables demonstrate an importance for these factors [47,48,49,50,51]. Very few studies, however, have investigated these factors in relation specifically to vegetables. Vegetables differ from fruit in many respects; in their health benefits, usual consumption patterns, the determinants of consumption and the need for intervention [52]. To understand and increase vegetable-specific consumption, studies focusing solely on vegetables are required. Focus on the affective factors involved in vegetable consumption, furthermore, may provide more scope for intervention and change, while changing abilities and circumstances or the consequences of these may be more difficult.
This study aimed to investigate the affective factors associated with a high vegetable intake and a wide variety of vegetables consumed by older adults in Europe. Demographic predictors were also assessed as known predictors of vegetable or fruit and vegetable intakes in the older population [30,34,46,50,53,54,55,56,57,58]. However, our focus is on liking and attitudes, due to the higher potential for intervention and change. Analyses were conducted on data from three European countries—France, Italy and the UK. These countries represent different European cultures, cuisines and consumption patterns, particularly with respect to vegetables [25,59]. In Italy, for example, salad and raw vegetables are frequently consumed [25,60], while the traditional diet in the UK contains more cooked and more root vegetables [25,61].

2. Method

Data were collected as part of the VeggiEAT project, an EU funded project aiming to understand and increase vegetable intakes in adolescents and older adults from four European countries—Denmark, France, Italy and the United Kingdom. Data to assess self-reported consumption, liking for vegetables and attitudes towards consumption that may impact on vegetable consumption were assessed using questionnaires. The study was approved by the Research Ethics Committees of Bournemouth University, UK, the University of Firenze, Italy, Institut Paul Bocuse, France and the University of Copenhagen, Denmark, prior to commencement (bu id: 2657). Only the data on older individuals and only data from France (FR), Italy (IT) and the United Kingdom (UK) are analysed here. Insufficient data were collected from the older sample in Denmark to be included in these analyses.

2.1. Questionnaire

The questionnaire assessed various demographic characteristics, self-reported vegetable consumption, self-reported regular consumption of various vegetables, liking for various vegetables, and attitudes to food consumption, in that order.
Demographic characteristics: The demographic characteristics assessed were gender, age, country of residence, highest educational qualification (5 options, scored 1 (no formal qualifications)–5 (Postgraduate qualification)), current or recent level of full time employment (4 options, scored 1 (unemployed)–4 (professional/managerial employment)), and social affluence (4 questions, resulting in a score from 0 (low)–9 (high)).
Quantity of vegetable consumption: Vegetable consumption was assessed using a single item measure—‘How many portions of vegetables do you consume in a usual day?’, response format: ‘none’, ‘1–2’, ‘3–4’, ‘5 or more’. A portion was defined as three tablespoons or 80 g of vegetables, for those who asked. Data were scored 0, 1.5, 3.5, and 5.5 respectively, to provide number of portions per day.
Variety of vegetables regularly consumed: Regular consumption of a variety of vegetables was assessed by asking for consumption of eleven vegetables of use in all four European countries [24]: ‘broccoli’, ‘carrots’, ‘cauliflower’, ‘green beans’, ‘green salad’, ‘peas’, ‘spinach’, ‘sweetcorn’, ‘tomatoes’, ‘courgettes’, and ‘beans, other than green beans’. This question was included as part of a measure asking individuals to report their knowledge and frequency of consumption for all eleven vegetables, as used by Backstrom et al. [62]. Responses to the option ‘I regularly eat this’ were added to provide number of vegetables regularly consumed.
Quantity and variety of vegetables regularly consumed combined: Quantity and variety of vegetables regularly consumed were also combined, to provide a measure of consumption that would be most beneficial for health [23,24]. This combination was undertaken by reducing portions per day and number of vegetables regularly consumed to scores between 0 and 1 (by dividing number of portions per day by 5.5 and variety of vegetables consumed by 11), and multiplying these scores to provide a score from 0 to 1, where a higher score denotes a higher quantity of a variety of vegetables consumed. Reductions of the initial responses to a score between 0 and 1 ensured equivalence of quantity and variety variables.
Liking: Liking was assessed for each of the eleven vegetables above, on an individual basis using a nine-point scale ranging from ‘I don’t like it at all’ to ‘I neither like it nor don’t like it’ to ‘I like it a lot’. Responses were scored −4 to 0 to +4 and the mean was calculated across all vegetables for analysis.
Attitudes: Attitudes towards food consumption were assessed using the Food Choice Questionnaire (FCQ) [63], the Restraint Scale of the Dutch Eating Behaviour Questionnaire (DEBQ-R) [64] and the Food Neophobia Scale (FNS) [65], and standard scoring procedures. On all three scales, higher scores denote higher motivation, dietary restraint, and food neophobia, respectively.
All questions were translated from English into relevant languages and back translated to ensure accurate translations. All questionnaires are frequently used to assess eating related attitudes and various studies demonstrate their applicability across countries and cultures [47,66,67,68,69,70]. The English version of the questionnaire can be found in Supplementary Materials I.

2.2. Questionnaire Administration

Questionnaires were administered in paper form either following a separate task assessing the sensory characteristics of several different pea and sweetcorn samples see [71], or following a separate task involving vegetable dish consumption in a cafeteria setting, or through the post as a study in it’s own right. For inclusion in either of the two tasks, individuals were required to be aged 65 years or over, able to come to the Institution undertaking the research, and able to fully understand and complete the consent and questionnaires. Participants were recruited by asking individuals who have previously participated in research, by contacting social groups for older people, and via advertisements in the local press. In both cases when tasks were undertaken, these were undertaken separately from completing the questionnaire, and are very unlikely to have had any impact on questionnaire responses. Researchers were available to answer questions if requested. For the postal study, individuals were known to research teams for having previously taken part in research, and were required to be aged 65 years or over. Contact with researchers remained possible via post, telephone and/or email. Multiple recruitment opportunities were used to enhance the variety of older adults completing the questionnaire. All individuals were living in the community (i.e., in their own homes or in a family home, and outside of residential care) at the time of assessment. All participants provided written informed consent. No other inclusion/exclusion criteria were used to enhance the generalisability of the study findings.
Questionnaires were administered until a sample size of at least 150 participants was gained per country, as required for the analyses we wished to conduct [72]. A minimum of 150 participants would allow the detection of an effect size of 0.15 in a regression analysis using 17 predictors, at a power of 0.80, for a significance level of 0.05.

2.3. Analysis

Questionnaires with 10% missing data or more were discarded. Where less than 10% data per respondent were missing, missing data were imputed using means for the country sample or mid-scale point values. Less than 2% of all data points were imputed, thus data imputation is likely to have had a minimal impact on our results while allowing use of more of the available data. Descriptive statistics and regression analyses were then run. Quantity of vegetables consumed, variety of vegetables regularly consumed, and quantity and variety combined were predicted using multiple linear regression. All analyses were conducted on quantity, variety and quantity × variety combined scores (0–1) for comparability. Outcomes were predicted using all demographic variables, where countries were ordered from North to South (UK, France, Italy), and all liking and attitude scales. A single country variable was used to retain as much power as possible in overall analyses. Analyses were conducted first on the overall sample (3 analyses—one investigating quantity; one investigating variety; one investigating quantity × variety). Due to significant impacts of country in these analyses, analyses were also conducted in each country separately (3 analyses per country, as above). In analyses on the Italian sample, consumption for reasons based on convenience were excluded from regression models due to high correlations with consumption for reasons based on price (r = 0.78, p < 0.01) and concerns over mutli-colinearity. Effects of price should thus be considered as effects of price/convenience in these analyses. No other concerns over multi-colinearity were found. Correlations between all predictor variables are provided in Supplementary Materials II. All analyses were conducted in SPSS (IBM, Armonk, NY, USA).

3. Results

3.1. Overall Sample

Complete data sets were gained from 497 individuals—187 individuals from France, 152 individuals from Italy, and 158 individuals from the UK. In the sample as a whole, mean quantity of vegetables consumed was low (mean = 2.1–2.7 portions/day) with a range from 0 to 5.5 portions; a mean of 6.1–6.7 different vegetables were consumed on a regular basis with a range from 0 to 11 vegetables; and scores for quantity and variety combined were low (mean = 0.19–0.36) with a range from the minimum possible to the maximum possible: 0–1. Descriptive details of the samples per country are provided in Table 1 and Table 2. Significant differences were found between countries in all demographic characteristics excepting the distribution of genders, and in measures of vegetable intake excepting the variety of vegetables consumed (smallest F(2,496) = 2.03, p = 0.13).
Quantity of vegetables consumed: Quantity scores were significantly predicted by the regression equation (R = 0.43, R2 = 0.19, adjusted R2 = 0.16, F(18,496) = 6.17, p < 0.01), where higher quantities of vegetable consumption were significantly associated with a higher age (β = 0.16, p < 0.01), a higher affluence score (β = 0.11, p = 0.03), living further North (β = −0.24, p < 0.01), a higher liking for vegetables (β = 0.16, p < 0.01) and a lower importance in consumption given to familiarity (β = −0.12, p = 0.04).
Variety of vegetables regularly consumed: Variety scores were significantly predicted by the regression equation (R = 0.54, R2 = 0.29, adjusted R2 = 0.26, F(18,496) = 10.63, p < 0.01), where greater variety of vegetable consumption was significantly associated with a higher liking for vegetables (β = 0.40, p < 0.01), a higher importance in consumption given to health benefits (β = 0.13, p = 0.02), and a lower importance in consumption given to familiarity (β = −0.11, p < 0.01).
Quantity and variety of vegetables consumed combined: Combined quantity and variety scores were significantly predicted by the regression equation (R = 0.48, R2 = 0.23, adjusted R2 = 0.20, F(18,496) = 7.81, p < 0.01), where higher quantities of a varied vegetable consumption were significantly associated with a higher age (β = 0.11, p = 0.02), living further North (β = −0.20, p < 0.01), a higher liking for vegetables (β = 0.27, p < 0.01), a higher importance in consumption given to health benefits (β = 0.14, p = 0.02), and a lower importance in consumption given to familiarity (β = −0.17, p < 0.01). Results from the regression analyses on the whole sample are presented in Table 3.

3.2. French Sample

Results from the regression analyses on the French sample, including regression equations are presented in Table 4. Higher quantities of vegetable consumption were significantly associated with a higher age (β = 0.30, p < 0.01); a higher educational level (β = 0.23, p < 0.01), and a lower neophobia score (β = −0.15, p = 0.05). A greater variety of vegetable consumption was significantly associated with a lower age (β = −0.18, p < 0.01); a higher liking for vegetables (β = 0.36, p < 0.01), and a higher importance given to health benefits (β = 0.25, p < 0.01). Higher quantities of a varied vegetable consumption were significantly associated with a higher educational level (β = −0.20, p < 0.01); a higher liking for vegetables (β = 0.29, p < 0.01), and a lower neophobia score (β = −0.17, p = 0.02).

3.3. Italian Sample

Results from the regression analyses on the Italian sample, including regression equations are presented in Table 5. Higher quantities of vegetable consumption were significantly associated with a higher liking for vegetables (β = 0.36, p < 0.01). A greater variety of vegetable consumption was significantly associated with a higher liking for vegetables (β = 0.48, p < 0.01), and a higher importance in consumption given to price/convenience (β = 0.22, p = 0.03). Higher quantities of a varied vegetable consumption were significantly associated with a higher educational level (β = 0.19, p = 0.03), and a higher liking for vegetables (β = 0.51, p < 0.01).

3.4. UK Sample

Results from the regression analyses on the UK sample, including regression equations, are presented in Table 6. Higher quantities of vegetable consumption were significantly associated with a higher age (β = 0.19, p = 0.04), and a higher importance in consumption given to health benefits (β = 0.24, p = 0.05). A greater variety of vegetable consumption was significantly associated with a higher liking for vegetables (β = 0.31, p < 0.01), and a higher importance in consumption given to weight control (β = 0.19, p = 0.05). Higher quantities of a varied vegetable consumption were significantly associated with a higher age (β = 0.18, p = 0.04); a higher liking for vegetables (β = 0.19, p = 0.03), and a higher importance in consumption given to health benefits (β = 0.28, p = 0.02).
A caution should be added to the findings on quantities of vegetable consumption in the UK sample, due to the lack of significance for the full regression model. This likely reflects a high contribution to the variance in quantity of vegetables consumed from variables that were not included in the regression model. Considering our a-priori interest in liking and attitudinal variables, we have continued to look at the individual predictors.

4. Discussion

Several key findings emerge from this study. Firstly, compared to World Health Organization guidelines (at least 160–240 g or 2–3 portions of vegetables/day), quantity, variety and quantity and variety of vegetables consumed combined were low, and several individuals reported either no vegetable consumption, or a regular consumption of no vegetables, or both. Our findings confirm those found in consumption databases [25], and extend these database findings to consider variety specifically. Both sets of findings demonstrate a need for intervention in this age group.
Secondly, quantity and variety of vegetables consumed were significantly associated with different demographic and attitudinal variables. Regarding demographic variables, higher quantities of vegetable consumption were associated with a higher age, and a higher affluence score, and higher quantities of a varied vegetable consumption were significantly associated with a higher age. Associations between vegetables consumption and age have previously been suggested [56,58], although reverse associations have also been found [53,73]. Together these findings suggest a relationship between vegetable consumption and age where vegetable consumption increases with age to a point and then drops off, presumably when age-related deteriorations in function and abilities and when chronic health conditions and disabilities begin to take effect [30,33,34,42,43,44,45,46,47]. Our findings most likely reflect the relatively young age of our older adults. Associations between vegetable consumption and affluence or socio-economic status have also previously been suggested [31,33,56,57,58], and associations between socio-economic status and healthy dietary and lifestyle habits are well known [28,31,50,53,56,58]. These associations have largely been associated with the monetary and practical costs of healthy dietary habits, and perceptions of fruits and vegetables as poor-value foods (in terms of energy provided per unit cost or unit effort) are reported [49,50,74]. These explanations may be over-simplifications to some degree [73], but monetary and practical costs may be particularly relevant to some older individuals [30,34,50].
Interestingly, however, affluence score was a predictor only of amount consumed, while variety of vegetables regularly consumed was not implicated. Other studies across Europe demonstrate a reverse association between affluence and intake to that found in the current study, where higher fruit and vegetable consumption has been reported in less affluent as opposed to more affluent individuals in Southern European countries, as a result of more traditional lifestyles [58]. This explanation may also explain our lack of association with variety. While money can essentially buy a lot of vegetables, eating a variety of vegetables may be associated both with being able to buy a variety of vegetables, but also with growing vegetables and with shopping for cheaper, seasonal vegetables, e.g., in markets. Growing vegetables and shopping for cheaper, seasonal vegetables are more likely to be the habits of less affluent as opposed to more affluent individuals. Variety of vegetables consumed thus may be unlikely to be associated overall with either a high or a low affluence.
Regarding liking and the attitudinal variables, greater quantity, variety and combined quantity and variety were associated with greater liking for vegetables and a lower concern for eating familiar foods, but a greater variety of vegetables consumed and a greater quantity of varied vegetable consumption were also associated with a greater concern for eating for health reasons.
Associations between vegetable consumption and liking are unsurprising. Repeated work demonstrates a role for liking in the consumption of vegetables throughout the lifespan [35,36,75,76], and previous work also demonstrates a role for liking in vegetable consumption and fruit and vegetable consumption in older consumers [34,47,48,49,50,77,78]. A role for liking in older consumers, while previously reported however, is important.
Associations between vegetable consumption and a lower concern for consuming familiar foods is interesting. This finding may reflect increased vegetable consumption in those willing to try different non-traditional preparation methods and dishes, e.g., stir-fries, or may demonstrate a necessary increase in willingness to consume unfamiliar dishes if a high vegetable consumption is to be attained. Pieniak et al. [69] report negative associations across Europe between traditional food consumption and concerns for a healthy diet, largely as a result of the high fat content of many traditional dishes [69]. Concern for health and a high consumption of vegetables thus may be associated with reduced preferences for traditional dishes and an increased willingness to consume unfamiliar, novel and unusual dishes. Alternatively, and/or additionally, associations between vegetable consumption and a willingness to try unfamiliar foods may be related to the bitter tastes often associated with vegetables [76,79], and may demonstrate the value of cooking methods and composite dishes where disliked tastes can be diluted or disguised [76,77,79]. In this case, unfamiliar dishes may include variations to familiar dishes as well as novel and unusual dishes. One other study in European older adults also finds an association between liking for fruit and vegetables and a willingness to try unusual foods [47].
The associations between consumption of a greater variety of vegetables (variety and quantity × variety combined) and greater concerns for eating for health reasons are also interesting. These findings suggest a particular role for health concerns in the consumption of a wide variety as opposed to a high quantity of vegetables. Consumption of a wide variety of vegetables will provide health benefits due to the different micronutrients found in different vegetables [11,12,13], and associations between health concerns and a variety of vegetables consumed suggest that consumers are aware of these associations. Previous studies report poor recognition of the different health benefits of different fruits and vegetables by younger consumers [74,80,81], but studies of or including older individuals suggest a better recognition of these benefits in older consumers [77,82]. When asked to specify the health conditions that benefit from fruit and vegetable consumption, older adults can spontaneously correctly identify a number of health conditions, including obesity, cardiovascular disease and some cancers [77], possibly as a result of a lifetime’s exposure to relevant public health information. Health knowledge and concern for consuming a healthy diet have also previously been associated with increased fruit and vegetable consumption in older adults [34,48,55,83].
Associations between vegetable consumption and liking, low concern for consuming familiar dishes and a high concern for consuming healthy dishes in the older age group are important findings. These findings suggest that interventions to improve vegetable consumption in this age group should focus on improving liking, increasing willingness to consume unfamiliar foods and dishes, and increasing knowledge of the health benefits of vegetables. Liking can be improved through repeated experience, increasing familiarity and the addition of ready-liked and familiar flavours to existing dishes. Various work demonstrates the value of these techniques for increasing likings for vegetables in different age groups [52] and work in older individuals demonstrates the value of the same techniques in these individuals for other foods, e.g., [84,85,86]. Willingness to consume unfamiliar foods can again be improved by repeated exposure and the addition of known and liked tastes and flavours, e.g., [87,88]. Opportunities for improving liking for vegetables through exposure to unfamiliar vegetables and dishes may also be possible through natural likings for flavours that are not yet known. The associations between vegetable consumption and willingness to consume unfamiliar dishes suggests that interventions need not involve familiar dishes. Liking and familiarity are often closely related [71], thus interventions that are based on familiar dishes, e.g., through the addition of vegetables to existing recipes, will likely be of benefit, but our findings also suggest that this is not necessary. Interventions that involve tasting novel fruit and vegetable products and involve different recipes and methods of cooking are typically well received [84,89,90], and can result in improvements in fruit and vegetable consumption [84,90]. These taste interventions may also be particularly useful for those of low socio-economic status, where new dishes tend to be avoided to reduce unaffordable waste [50].
Knowledge of the health benefits of vegetables and concern for consuming a healthy diet can be increased through educational and motivational campaigns [35], and various studies demonstrate the benefits of these types of intervention for increasing vegetable consumption in adults [52]. Health-based campaigns furthermore may be preferential both for increasing health benefits and for reducing socio-economic disparities, but we agree with others that liking and pleasure should be addressed alongside health campaigns [77]. In all our assessments, liking was a stronger predictor of intake than any other factor.
Higher quantities of vegetable consumption and a varied vegetable consumption were also associated with living further North. Higher consumption was found in the UK compared to France compared to Italy, but whether these effects are due to the country or due to the different samples studied in each country is unknown. Previous studies and consumption databases typically report a higher vegetable consumption in Southern as opposed to Northern European countries [25,33,57,58,60,73], and differences were found between the different samples for each country on several demographic variables, although genuine effects as a result of income/affluence from South to North have also been suggested [31]. Given the differences between samples, while the analyses within countries are likely to be accurate [47,67,68,69,70], direct comparisons between countries should only be conducted with caution.
Considering the analyses per country, in France, higher quantities of vegetable consumption were associated with a higher age, higher educational level, and a lower neophobia score; a greater variety of consumption was associated with a lower age, a higher liking for vegetables and a higher importance given to health benefits; and higher quantities of a varied vegetable consumption were associated with a higher educational level, a higher liking for vegetables, and a lower neophobia score. Effects due to increasing age, liking and an importance given to health benefits were found in the main analyses, and effects due to educational level and neophobia score reflect those found in the main analyses based on affluence score and the importance given to familiar foods respectively [58]. Effects of a lower age possibly reflect an importance given to familiar foods, as younger individuals (within the older age bracket (65 years plus)) tend to be more willing to consume less familiar foods, but an association between variety and younger age may also reflect the abilities required to consume a variety of vegetables [53].
In Italy, higher quantities of vegetable consumption were associated with a higher liking for vegetables, a greater variety of vegetable consumption was associated with a higher liking, and a higher importance given to price/convenience, and higher quantities of a varied vegetable consumption were associated with a higher educational level and a higher liking for vegetables. Effects of liking and educational level again reflect those in the main analyses. Effects between variety of vegetables consumed and an importance of price/convenience likely result from the traditional lifestyle in Italy. The majority of older individuals living in the community in Italy are likely to grow their own vegetables or shop for vegetables in local markets, to result in vegetable consumption that is cheaper and convenient [31,58,60]. In both these scenarios, the vegetables available will be seasonal, naturally resulting in a variety of vegetables consumed. Raw vegetables or large vegetable-based dishes such as soups and casseroles can also form cheap and easy meals, and these are staple foods of the Italian diet [60].
In the UK, higher quantities of vegetable consumption were associated with a higher age, a higher educational level, and a higher importance given to health benefits; a greater variety of consumption was associated with a higher liking for vegetables, and a higher importance given to weight control; and higher quantities of a varied vegetable consumption were associated with a higher age, a higher liking for vegetables, and a higher importance given to health benefits. Effects as a result of age, educational level, liking, and an importance of health benefits, again reflect those of the main analyses. Associations between variety of vegetables consumed and concerns regarding weight control may reflect a use of vegetables to control body weight specifically or advice for this behaviour as a result of the low energy density of vegetables [23,24,90]. These associations are thus also likely to be related to health concerns/benefits.
The consistency of many of the effects across countries is interesting and gives weight to these findings. While the patterns in the three countries are largely similar, some differences between countries may suggest the need for specific interventions in certain countries or population samples. Vegetable consumption in individuals living in communities served by local markets, for example, may benefit from interventions based on price, convenience and encouraging market shopping. Vegetable consumption in individuals with higher BMIs may benefit from interventions focussing on weight concerns. It is interesting furthermore, that the key differences between countries or between samples were found in variety of vegetables consumed, as opposed to in quantities consumed. These findings may suggest a further need for research specifically in this behaviour.
The strengths of the study include the consideration of vegetable consumption specifically as a food group of different consumption patterns, barriers to consumption and likely need for intervention compared to other foods [52], and the comparability of the results in three different European countries. The study is limited by the use of self-report questionnaires, and limited items to assess key outcomes. Particularly, quantity of vegetable consumption was assessed using a single question, variety was assessed using measures of the consumption of eleven pre-specified vegetables, while other vegetables may also be consumed, and no attempts were made to try and assess the accuracy of these measures using food diaries. Although self-report measures are commonly used in questionnaire studies of dietary behaviours, and brief measures have been reported as valid methods for measuring vegetable intake [91,92], these measures can be prone to inaccuracies and biases such as social desirability bias [93]. Our mean self-reported vegetable intakes (quantity) are notably higher than population averages [25,60] suggesting possible social desirability bias, but our sample may also be higher consumers of vegetables considering sufficient interest to participate in the study. While these measures may have resulted in slight inaccuracies in measures of vegetable intake, however, there is no reason to suspect any systematic bias in the associations between vegetable intake and food choice motives based on these measures. We also did not measure a number of lifestyle behaviours of potential impact on dietary intakes, such as living arrangements, social support and disabilities [30,33,34,46,55]. These were not measured to retain our focus on liking and attitudinal factors, but some of these factors may have increased the amount of variance predicted. Our findings are a result purely of the models considered. Thus, consideration of the liking and attitudinal factors in the absence of the demographic factors may also have changed the findings. Significant effects of socio-economic status, may be masking concerns in consumption due to price, for example. The study is also limited by small sample sizes in each of the individual countries and the particular details of these samples, e.g., data were only collected from individuals able to provide consent. Our results are thus limited to individuals who are relatively fit and able within the older population. The impact of this bias on associations between intakes and food choice motives remains unknown. The low comparability between country samples limits the cross-country conclusions that can be made. This variability between samples however, does not reduce the value of the findings from our main analyses, and in fact may increase the generalizability of these findings.

5. Conclusions

This study demonstrates a role for a higher liking and a lower concern for eating familiar foods in increased vegetable consumption (quantity, variety and quantity and variety combined), and a particular role for a greater concern for health benefits in the consumption of a greater variety of vegetables (variety and quantity and variety combined). These findings suggest that interventions to improve vegetable consumption in older adults should focus on improving liking, increasing willingness to consume unfamiliar foods and dishes, and increasing concern for health benefits.

Supplementary Materials

The following are available online at www.mdpi.com/2072-6643/9/9/923/s1.

Acknowledgments

This work is part of EU/FP7 Funded VeggiEAT project (Grant Nr PIAP-GA-2013-612326).

Author Contributions

K.M.A. conceived and undertook the analyses and wrote the manuscript, C.D. designed the questionnaire, all authors helped with data collection, and reviewed and offered critical comments on the manuscript.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest. The funding sponsor had no role in the design of the study, in the collection, analyses or interpretation of data, in the writing of the manuscript, or in the decision to publish the results.

References

  1. Aune, D.; Giovannucci, E.; Boffetta, P.; Fadnes, L.T.; Keum, N.; Norat, T.; Greenwood, D.C.; Riboli, E.; Vatten, L.J.; Tonstad, S. Fruit and vegetable intake and the risk of cardiovascular disease, total cancer and all-cause mortality—A systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis of prospective studies. Int. J. Epidemiol. 2017. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Oyebode, O.; Gordon-Dseagu, V.; Walker, A.; Mindell, J.S. Fruit and vegetable consumption and all-cause, cancer and CVD mortality: Analysis of Health Survey for England data. J. Epidemiol. Community Health 2014, 68, 856–862. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Hu, D.; Huang, J.; Wang, Y.; Zhang, D.; Qu, Y. Fruits and vegetables consumption and risk of stroke: A meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies. Stroke 2014, 45, 1613–16149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Villegas, R.; Shu, X.O.; Gao, Y.T.; Yang, G.; Elasy, T.; Li, H.; Zheng, W. Vegetable but not fruit consumption reduces the risk of type 2 diabetes in Chinese women. J. Nutr. 2008, 138, 574–580. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  5. Wu, Y.; Zhang, D.; Jiang, X.; Jiang, W. Fruit and vegetable consumption and risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus: A dose response meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies. Nutr. Metab. Cardiovasc. Dis. 2015, 25, 140–147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Liu, Y.T.; Dai, J.J.; Xu, C.H.; Lu, Y.K.; Fan, Y.Y.; Zhang, X.L.; Zhang, C.X.; Chen, Y.M. Greater intake of fruit and vegetables is associated with lower risk of nasopharyngeal carcinoma in Chinese adults: A case-control study. Cancer Causes Control 2012, 23, 589–599. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Masala, G.; Assedi, M.; Bendinelli, B.; Ermini, I.; Sieri, S.; Grioni, S.; Sacerdote, C.; Ricceri, F.; Panico, S.; Mattiello, A.; et al. Fruit and vegetables consumption and breast cancer risk: the EPIC Italy study. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 2012, 132, 1127–1136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. Polesel, J.; Serraino, D.; Negri, E.; Barzan, L.; Vaccher, E.; Montella, M.; Zucchetto, A.; Garavello, W.; Franceschi, S.; La Vecchia, C.; et al. Consumption of fruit, vegetables, and other food groups and the risk of nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Cancer Causes Control 2013, 24, 1157–1165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. Loef, M.; Walach, H. Fruit, vegetables and prevention of cognitive decline or dementia: A systematic review of cohort studies. J. Nutr. Health Ageing 2012, 16, 626–630. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Morris, M.C.; Evans, D.A.; Tangney, C.C.; Bienias, J.L.; Wilson, R.S. Associations of vegetable and fruit consumption with age-related cognitive change. Neurology 2006, 67, 1370–1376. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  11. Liu, R.H. Health-promoting components of fruits and vegetables in the diet. Adv. Nutr. 2013, 4, 384S–392S. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Slavin, J.L.; Lloyd, B. Health benefits of fruits and vegetables. Adv. Nutr. 2012, 3, 506–516. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Sharma, S.; Sheehy, T.; Kolonel, L. Sources of vegetables, fruits and vitamins A, C and E among five ethnic groups: Results from a multiethnic cohort study. Eur. J. Clin. Nutr. 2014, 68, 384–391. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Carter, P.; Gray, L.J.; Troughton, J.; Khunti, K.; Davies, M.J. Fruit and vegetable intake and incidence of type 2 diabetes mellitus: Systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ 2010, 341, c4229. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Cooper, A.J.; Forouhi, N.G.; Ye, Z.; Buijsse, B.; Arriola, L.; Balkau, B.; Barricarte, A.; Beulens, J.W.; Boeing, H.; Büchner, F.L.; et al. Fruit and vegetable intake and type 2 diabetes: EPIC-InterAct prospective study and meta-analysis. Eur. J. Clin. Nutr. 2012, 66, 1082–1092. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Li, M.; Fan, Y.; Zhang, X.; Hou, W.; Tang, Z. Fruit and vegetable intake and risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus: Meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies. BMJ Open 2014, 5, e005497. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Takata, Y.; Xiang, Y.B.; Yang, G.; Li, H.; Gao, J.; Cai, H.; Gao, Y.; Zheng, W.; Shu, X. Intakes of fruits, vegetables, and related vitamins and lung cancer risk: Results from the Shanghai Men’s Health Study (2002–2009). Nutr Cancer 2013, 65, 51–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Tsai, A.C.; Chang, T.L.; Chi, S.H. Frequent consumption of vegetables predicts lower risk of depression in older Taiwanese—Results of a prospective population-based study. Public Health Nutr. 2012, 15, 1087–1092. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. Liu, X.; Lv, K. Cruciferous vegetables intake is inversely associated with risk of breast cancer: A meta-analysis. Breast 2013, 22, 309–313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  20. Liu, B.; Mao, Q.; Cao, M.; Xie, L. Cruciferous vegetables intake and risk of prostate cancer: A meta-analysis. Int. J. Urol. 2012, 19, 134–141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  21. Liu, B.; Mao, Q.; Lin, Y.; Zhou, F.; Xie, L. The association of cruciferous vegetables intake and risk of bladder cancer: A meta-analysis. World J. Urol. 2013, 31, 127–133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Wu, Q.J.; Yang, Y.; Vogtmann, E.; Wang, J.; Han, L.H.; Li, H.L.; Xiang, Y.B. Cruciferous vegetables intake and the risk of colorectal cancer: A meta-analysis of observational studies. Ann. Oncol. 2013, 24, 1079–1087. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. World Health Organization. Diet, Nutrition and the Prevention of Chronic Diseases: Report of a Joint FAO/WHO Expert Consultation; WHO Technical Report Series, No. 916; WHO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2003. [Google Scholar]
  24. World Health Organization. Fruit and Vegetables for Health Report of a Joint FAO/WHO Workshop, 1–3 September 2004, Kobe, Japan; WHO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2005. [Google Scholar]
  25. European Food Safety Authority. Concise Database Summary Statistics—Total Population. Available online: http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/datexfoodcdb/datexfooddb.htm (accessed on 20 March 2017).
  26. United States Department of Agriculture. Available online: http://www.ers.usda.gov/Data/FoodConsumption/FoodAvailSpreadsheets.htm (accessed on 20 March 2017).
  27. Franchini, B.; Poínhos, R.; Klepp, K.I.; Vaz de Almeida, M.D. Fruit and vegetables: Intake and sociodemographic determinants among Portuguese mothers. Ann. Nutr. Metab. 2013, 63, 131–138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Dijkstra, S.C.; Neter, J.E.; Brouwer, I.A.; Huisman, M.; Visser, M. Adherence to dietary guidelines for fruit, vegetables and fish among older Dutch adults; the role of education, income and job prestige. J. Nutr. Health Ageing 2014, 18, 115–121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  29. Myhre, J.B.; Løken, E.B.; Wandel, M.; Andersen, L.F. Meal types as sources for intakes of fruits, vegetables, fish and whole grains among Norwegian adults. Public Health Nutr. 2015, 18, 2011–2021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  30. Donkin, A.J.; Johnson, A.E.; Morgan, K.; Neale, R.J.; Page, R.M.; Silburn, R.L. Gender and living alone as determinants of fruit and vegetable consumption among the elderly living at home in urban Nottingham. Appetite 1998, 30, 39–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  31. Kamphuis, C.B.M.; Giskes, K.; de Bruijn, G.J.; Wendel-Vos, W.; Brug, J.; von Lenthe, F.J. Environmental determinants of fruit and vegetable determinants among adults: A systematic review. Br. J. Nutr. 2006, 96, 620–635. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  32. Yen, S.T.; Tan, A.K. Who are eating and not eating fruits and vegetables in Malaysia? Int. J. Public Health 2012, 57, 945–951. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  33. Nicklett, E.J.; Kadell, A.R. Fruit and vegetable consumption among older adults a scoping review. Maturitas 2013, 75, 305–312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Baker, A.H.; Wardle, J. Sex differences in fruit and vegetable intake in older adults. Appetite 2003, 40, 269–275. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Glasson, C.; Chapman, K.; James, E. Fruit and vegetables should be targeted separately in health promotion programmes: Differences in consumption levels, barriers, knowledge and stages of readiness for change. Public Health Nutr. 2011, 14, 694–701. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Larson, N.I.; Neumark-Sztainer, D.R.; Harnack, L.J.; Wall, M.M.; Story, M.T.; Eisenberg, M.E. Fruit and vegetable intake correlates during the transition to young adulthood. Am. J. Prev. Med. 2008, 35, 33–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Brown, K.N.; Wengreen, H.J.; Vitale, T.S.; Anderson, J.B. Increased self-efficacy for vegetable preparation following an online, skill-based intervention and in-class tasting experience as a part of a general education college nutrition course. Am. J. Health Promot. 2011, 26, 14–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. McMahon, A.T.; Tapsell, L.; Williams, P.; Jobling, J. Baby leafy green vegetables: Providing insight into an old problem? An exploratory qualitative study examining influences on their consumption. Health Promot. J. Aust. 2013, 24, 68–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  39. Izumi, B.T.; Zenk, S.N.; Schulz, A.J.; Mentz, G.B.; Wilson, C. Associations between neighborhood availability and individual consumption of dark-green and orange vegetables among ethnically diverse adults in Detroit. JADA 2011, 111, 274–279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  40. Darian, J.C.; Tucci, L. Developing marketing strategies to increase vegetable consumption. J. Consum. Mark. 2013, 30, 427–435. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Kremer-Sadlik, T.; Morgenstern, A.; Peters, C.; Beaupoil, P.; Caët, S.; Debras, C.; le Mené, M. Eating fruits and vegetables. An ethnographic study of American and French family dinners. Appetite 2015, 89, 84–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  42. Best, R.L.; Appleton, K.M. Investigating protein consumption in older adults: A focus group study. J. Nutr. Educ. Behav. 2013, 45, 751–755. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  43. Brennan, D.S.; Singh, K.A.; Liu, P.; Spencer, A. Fruit and vegetable consumption among older adults by tooth loss and socio-economic status. Aust. Dent. J. 2010, 55, 143–149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Tamura, B.K.; Bell, C.L.; Masaki, K.H.; Amelia, E.J. Factors associated with weight loss, low BMI, and malnutrition among nursing home patients: A systematic review of the literature. J. Am. Med. Dir. Assoc. 2013, 14, 649–655. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Verbrugge, M.; Beeckman, D.; van Hecke, A.; Vanderwee, K.; Van Herck, K.; Clays, E.; Bocquaert, I.; Derycke, H.; Geurden, B.; Verhaeghe, S. Malnutrition and associated factors in nursing home residents: A cross-sectional, multi-centre study. Clin. Nutr. 2013, 32, 438–443. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Vinther, J.L.; Conklin, A.I.; Wareham, N.J.; Monsivais, P. Marital transitions and associated changes in fruit and vegetable intake: Findings from the population-based prospective EPIC-Norfolk cohort, UK. Soc. Sci. Med. 2016, 157, 120–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  47. Mingioni, M.; Mehinagic, E.; Laguna, L.; Sarkar, A.; Pirttijärvi, T.; Van Wymelbeke, V.; Artigas, G.; Chen, J.; Kautola, H.; Järvenpää, E.; et al. Fruit and vegetables liking among European elderly according to food preferences, attitudes towards food and dependency. Food Qual. Pref. 2016, 50, 27–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Appleton, K.M.; McGill, R.; Neville, C.; Woodside, J.V. Barriers to increasing fruit and vegetable intakes in the older population of Northern Ireland: Low levels of liking and low awareness of current recommendations. Public Health Nutr. 2010, 13, 514–521. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  49. Cox, D.J.; Anderson, A.S.; Lean, M.E.J.; Mela, D.J. UK consumer attitudes belief and barriers to increasing fruit and vegetable consumption. Public Health Nutr. 1998, 1, 61–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  50. Dijkstra, S.C.; Neter, J.E.; van Stralen, M.M.; Knol, D.L.; Brouwer, I.A.; Huisman, M.; Visser, M. The role of perceived barriers in explaining socio-economic status differences in adherence to the fruit, vegetable and fish guidelines in older adults: A mediation study. Public Health Nutr. 2015, 18, 797–808. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  51. Sjoberg, S.; Kim, K.; Reicks, M. Applying the theory of planned behavior to fruit and vegetable consumption by older adults. J. Nutr. Elder. 2004, 23, 35–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  52. Appleton, K.M.; Hemingway, A.; Saulais, L.; Dinnella, C.; Monteleone, E.; Depezay, L.; Morizet, D.; Armando Perez-Cueto, F.J.; Bevan, A.; Hartwell, H. Increasing vegetable intakes: Rationale and systematic review of published interventions. Eur. J. Nutr. 2016, 55, 869–896. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  53. Appleton, K.M.; McGill, R.; Woodside, J.V. Fruit and vegetable consumption in older people in Northern Ireland: Levels and patterns. Br. J. Nutr. 2009, 102, 949–953. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  54. Doubova, S.V.; Sanchez-Garcia, S.; Infante-Castanedas, C.; Perez-Cuevas, R. Factors associated with regular physical exercise and consumption of fruits and vegetables among Mexican older adults. BMC Public Health 2016, 16, 952. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  55. Hughes, G.; Bennett, K.M.; Hetherington, M.M. Old and alone: Barriers to healthy eating in older men living on their own. Appetite 2004, 43, 269–276. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  56. Lindström, M.; Hanson, B.S.; Wirfält, E.; Ostergren, P.O. Socioeconomic differences in the consumption of vegetables, fruit and fruit juices. Eur. J. Public Health 2001, 11, 51–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  57. Plessz, M.; Gueguen, A.; Goldberg, M.; Czernichow, S.; Zins, M. Ageing, retirement and changes in vegetable consumption in France: Findings from the prospective GAZEL cohort. Br. J. Nutr. 2011, 114, 979–987. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  58. Roos, G.; Johansson, L.; Kasmel, A.; Klumbiené, J.; Prättälä, R. Disparities invegetable and fruit consumption: European cases from the north to the south. Public Health Nutr. 2001, 4, 35–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  59. Pelt, J.M. Des Legumes; Les Editions Fayard: Paris, France, 1993. [Google Scholar]
  60. Masala, G.; Ceroti, M.; Pala, V. A dietary pattern rich in olive oil and raw vegetables is associated with lower mortality in Italian elderly subjects. Br. J. Nutr. 2007, 98, 406–415. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  61. Finch, S.; Doyle, W.; Lowe, C.; Bates, C.; Prentice, A.; Smithers, G.; Clarke, P.C. National Diet and Nutrition Survey: People Aged 65 Years and Over; Stationery Office: London, UK, 1998; Volume 1. [Google Scholar]
  62. Backstrom, A.; Pirttila-Backman, A.M.; Tuorila, H. Willingness to try new foods as predicted by social representations and attitude and trait scales. Appetite 2004, 43, 75–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  63. Steptoe, A.; Pollard, T.M.; Wardle, J. Development of a measure of the motives underlying the selection of food: The food choice questionnaire. Appetite 1995, 25, 267–284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  64. Van Strien, T.; Frijters, J.E.; Bergers, G.; Defares, P.B. The Dutch Eating Behavior Questionnaire (DEBQ) for assessment of restrained, emotional and external eating behavior. Int. J Eating Disord. 1986, 5, 295–315. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Pliner, P.; Hobden, K. Development of a scale to measure the trait of food neophobia in humans. Appetite 1992, 19, 105–120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Brunault, P.; Rabemampianina, I.; Apfeldorfer, G.; Ballon, N.; Couet, C.; Réveillère, C.; Gaillard, P.; El-Hage, W. The Dutch Eating Behavior Questionnaire: Further psychometric validation and clinical implications of the French version in normal weight and obese persons. Presse Med. 2015, 44, e363–e372. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  67. Fotopoulos, C.; Krystallis, A.; Vassallo, M.; Pagiaslis, A. Food choice questionnaire (FCQ) revisited. Suggestions for the development of an enhanced general food motivation model. Appetite 2009, 52, 199–208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  68. Januszewska, R.; Pieniak, Z.; Verbeke, W. Food choice questionnaire revisited in four countries. Does it still measure the same? Appetite 2011, 57, 94–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  69. Pieniak, Z.; Verbeke, W.; Vanhonacker, F.; Guerrero, L.; Hersleth, M. Association between traditional food consumption and motives for food choice in six European countries. Appetite 2009, 53, 101–108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  70. Ritchey, P.N.; Frank, R.A.; Hursti, U.-K.; Tuorila, H. validation and cross-national comparison of the food neophobia scale (FNS) using confirmatory factor analysis. Appetite 2003, 40, 163–173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Dinnella, C.; Morizet, D.; Masi, C.; Danny, C.; Depezay, L.; Appleton, K.M.; Giboreau, A.; Perez-Cueto, F.J.A.; Hartwell, H.; Monteleone, E. Sensory determinants of stated liking for vegetable names and actual liking for canned vegetables: A cross-country study among European adolescents. Appetite 2016, 107, 339–347. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  72. Cohen, J. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioural Sciences, 2nd ed.; Lawrence Earlbaum Associates: Hillsdale, NJ, USA, 1998. [Google Scholar]
  73. Bamia, C.; Orfanos, P.; Ferrari, P.; Overvad, K.; Hundborg, H.H.; Tjønneland, A.; Olsen, A.; Kesse, E.; Boutron-Ruault, M.C.; Clavel-Chapelon, F.; et al. Dietary patterns among older Europeans: The EPIC-Elderly study. Br. J. Nutr. 2005, 94, 100–113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  74. Dibsdall, L.A.; Lambert, N.; Frewer, L.J. Using interpretative phenomenology to understand the food-related experiences and beliefs of a select group of low-income UK women. J. Nutr. Educ. Behav. 2002, 34, 298–309. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Brug, J.; Tak, N.I.; te Velde, S.J.; Bere, E.; de Bourdeaudhuij, I. Taste preferences, liking and other factors related to fruit and vegetable intakes among schoolchildren: Results from observational studies. Br. J. Nutr 2008, 99, S7–S14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  76. Poelman, A.A.M.; Delahunty, C.M.; de Graaf, C. Vegetable preparation practices for 5–6 years old Australian children as reported by their parents; relationships with liking and consumption. Food Qual. Pref. 2015, 42, 20–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Dixon, H.; Mullins, R.; Wakefield, M.; Hill, D. Encouraging the consumption of FVs by older Australians: An experiential study. J. Nutr. Educ. Behav. 2004, 36, 245–249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Winter Falk, L.; Bisogni, C.A.; Sobal, J. Food choice processes of older adults: A qualitative investigation. J. Nutr. Educ. 1996, 28, 257–265. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Zeinstra, G.G.; Koelen, M.A.; Kok, F.J.; van der Laan, N.; de Graaf, C. Parental child-feeding strategies in relation to Dutch children’s fruit and vegetable intake. Public Health Nutr. 2009, 13, 787–796. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  80. Herbert, G.; Butler, L.; Kennedy, O.; Lobb, A. Young UK adults and the 5 A DAY campaign: Perceived benefits and barriers to eating more fruits and vegetables. Int. J. Consum. Stud. 2010, 34, 657–664. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Rooney, C.; McKinley, M.C.; Appleton, K.M.; Young, I.S.; McGrath, A.J.; Draffin, C.R.; Hamill, L.L.; Woodside, J.V. How much is ‘5-a-day’?: A qualitative investigation into consumer understanding of fruit and vegetable intake guidelines. J. Hum. Nutr. Diet. 2017, 30, 105–113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  82. Appleton, K.M.; Krumplevska, K.; Smith, E.; Rooney, C.; McKinley, M.C.; Woodside, J.V. Low fruit and vegetable knowledge is associated with low knowledge of the details of the 5-a-day fruit and vegetable message in the UK: Findings from two cross-sectional questionnaire studies. J. Hum. Nutr. Diet. 2017. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  83. Wardle, J.; Parementer, K.; Waller, J. Nutrition knowledge and food intake. Appetite 2000, 34, 269–275. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  84. Appleton, K.M. Increases in fruit intakes in low consumers of fruit following two community-based repeated exposure interventions. Br. J. Nutr. 2013, 109, 795–801. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  85. Appleton, K.M. Increases in energy, protein and fat intake following the addition of sauce to an older person’s meal. Appetite 2009, 52, 161–165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  86. Best, R.L.; Appleton, K.M. Comparable increases in energy, protein and fat intakes following the addition of seasonings and sauces to an older person’s meal. Appetite 2011, 56, 179–182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  87. Barends, C.; de Vries, J.H.; Mojet, J.; de Graaf, C. Effects of repeated exposure to either vegetables or fruit on infant’s vegetable and fruit acceptance at the beginning of weaning. Food Qual. Pref. 2013, 29, 157–165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Pliner, P.; Stahlberg-White, C. Pass the ketchup please: Familiar flavors increase children’s willingness to taste novel foods. Appetite 2000, 34, 95–103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  89. Dye, C.J.; Cason, K.L. Perceptions of older, low income women about increasing intake of fruit and vegetables. J. Nutr. Elder. 2005, 25, 21–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  90. Lancaster, K.J. Characteristics influencing daily consumption of fruit and vegetable and low-fat dairy products in older adults with hypertension. J. Nutr. Elder. 2004, 23, 21–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  91. Mainvil, L.A.; Horwath, C.C.; McKenzie, J.E.; Lawson, R. Validation of brief instruments to measure adult fruit and vegetable consumption. Appetite 2011, 56, 111–117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  92. Wolfe, W.S.; Frongillo, E.A.; Cassano, P.A. Evaluating brief measures of fruit and vegetable consumption frequency and variety: Cognition, interpretation, and other measurement issues. J. Am. Diet. Assoc. 2001, 101, 311–318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Bingham, S.A. The dietary assessment of individuals: Methods, accuracy, new techniques and recommendation. Nutr. Abstr. Rev. (Ser. A) 1987, 57, 705–737. [Google Scholar]
Table
Table 1. Descriptive statistics (n and %, or mean and standard deviation) for demographic variables in all three countries (n = 497).
Table 1. Descriptive statistics (n and %, or mean and standard deviation) for demographic variables in all three countries (n = 497).
CharacteristicTotal (n = 497)France (n = 187)Italy (n = 152)UK (n = 158)
GenderMale160 (32%)51 (27%)57 (38%)52 (33%)
Female337 (68%)136 (73%)95 (63%)106 (67%)
Age (years) 72.1 (6.7)69.7 (5.3)72.8 (7.0)74.2 (7.0)
Highest instruction levelNo qualifications198 (40%)78 (42%)64 (42%)56 (35%)
School certificate147 (30%)33 (20%)66 (43%)43 (27%)
College certificate91 (18%)33 (18%)21 (14%)37 (23%)
University degree47 (9%)38 (20%)1 (1%)8 (5%)
Professional qualification14 (3%)0014 (9%)
Current/most recent employmentUnemployed61 (12%)31 (17%)25 (16%)5 (3%)
Manual worker62 (13%)10 (5%)37 (24%)15 (10%)
Non-manual worker237 (48%)105 (56%)70 (46%)62 (39%)
Professional/management137 (28%)41 (22%)20 (13%)76 (48%)
Affluence (0–9) 4.5 (1.9)4.5 (1.8)4.0 (1.8)5.1 (2.0)
Significant differences between countries are emboldened.
Table
Table 2. Descriptive statistics (mean, standard deviation) for quantity and variety of vegetable consumption and all attitudinal variables in all three countries (n = 497).
Table 2. Descriptive statistics (mean, standard deviation) for quantity and variety of vegetable consumption and all attitudinal variables in all three countries (n = 497).
CharacteristicTotal (n = 497)France (n = 187)Italy (n = 152)UK (n = 158)
Quantity of vegetables consumed (portions)2.4 (0.7)2.3 (0.6)2.1 (0.5)2.7 (0.8)
Quantity score (0–1)0.4 (0.3)0.4 (0.2)0.3 (0.2)0.6 (0.4)
Different vegetables consumed regularly (number)6.5 (2.9)6.6 (2.8)6.1 (3.2)6.7 (2.6)
Variety score (0–1)0.6 (0.3)0.6 (0.2)0.6 (0.3)0.6 (0.2)
Quantity x variety score (0–1)0.3 (0.2)0.24 (0.2)0.19 (0.2)0.35 (0.3)
Liking (−4–+4)2.5 (1.2)2.8 (1.0)2.4 (1.2)2.4 (1.3)
FCQ—Mood (1–7)4.8 (1.5)4.5 (1.5)5.7 (1.1)4.2 (1.4)
FCQ—Sensory Appeal (1–7)6.1 (1.0)6.1 (1.0)6.4 (0.8)6.0 (1.0)
FCQ—Natural Content (1–7)5.7 (1.3)5.7 (1.5)6.2 (0.9)5.3 (1.3)
FCQ—Health (1–7)6.0 (1.0)6.1 (1.0)5.9 (0.8)5.8 (1.0)
FCQ—Convenience (1–7)5.4 (1.2)5.4 (1.2)5.6 (1.1)5.1 (1.3)
FCQ—Price (1–7)5.3 (1.2)5.3 (1.1)5.5 (1.2)5.0 (1.2)
FCQ—Weight Control (1–7)5.2 (1.4)5.3 (1.3)5.5 (1.3)4.7 (1.6)
FCQ—Familiarity (1–7)5.1 (1.3)5.4 (1.1)5.7 (0.9)4.4 (1.6)
FCQ—Ethical Concern (1–7)4.9 (1.5)4.9 (1.5)5.6 (1.1)4.4 (1.5)
DEBQ—R score (1–5)2.7 (0.9)2.9 (0.8)2.5 (0.8)2.7 (0.9)
Neophobia score (1–70)31.7 (14.3)32.7 (12.8)28.5 (17.8)33.4 (11.5)
Table
Table 3. Results of the regression analyses using demographic characteristics and all liking and attitude variables to predict quantity, variety and combined quantity and variety scores in all participants (n = 497).
Table 3. Results of the regression analyses using demographic characteristics and all liking and attitude variables to predict quantity, variety and combined quantity and variety scores in all participants (n = 497).
QuantityVarietyCombined Quantity and Variety
βpβpβp
Gender−0.170.71<0.010.97−0.020.58
Age0.16<0.01−0.070.130.110.02
Instruction level0.080.12<0.010.980.060.22
Employment level0.020.760.020.670.010.77
Affluence score0.110.030.020.660.100.06
Country−0.24<0.01−0.070.19−0.20<0.01
Liking0.16<0.010.40<0.010.27<0.01
FCQ—Mood0.050.36−0.060.230.040.41
FCQ—Sensory Appeal0.060.250.060.190.080.08
FCQ—Natural Content0.020.800.050.340.020.76
FCQ—Health0.080.190.130.020.140.02
FCQ—Convenience−0.020.800.060.30−0.010.89
FCQ—Price0.010.83−0.040.47−0.010.90
FCQ—Weight Control−0.110.070.040.42−0.060.29
FCQ—Familiarity−0.120.04−0.110.04−0.17<0.01
FCQ—Ethical Concern0.050.340.050.360.050.35
DEBQ—Restraint0.010.76−0.010.84−0.010.92
Neophobia score−0.030.53−0.050.23−0.030.48
Significant predictors are emboldened.
Table
Table 4. Results of the regression analyses using demographic characteristics and all liking and attitude variables to predict quantity, variety and combined quantity and variety scores in French participants (n = 187). Regression equations: Quantity: R = 0.46, R2 = 0.21, adjusted R2 = 0.13, F(17,186) = 2.60, p < 0.01; Variety: R = 0.67, R2 = 0.45, adjusted R2 = 0.40, F(17,186) = 8.27, p < 0.01; Combined quantity and variety: R = 0.46, R2 = 0.21, adjusted R2 = 0.13, F(17,186) = 2.60, p < 0.01.
Table 4. Results of the regression analyses using demographic characteristics and all liking and attitude variables to predict quantity, variety and combined quantity and variety scores in French participants (n = 187). Regression equations: Quantity: R = 0.46, R2 = 0.21, adjusted R2 = 0.13, F(17,186) = 2.60, p < 0.01; Variety: R = 0.67, R2 = 0.45, adjusted R2 = 0.40, F(17,186) = 8.27, p < 0.01; Combined quantity and variety: R = 0.46, R2 = 0.21, adjusted R2 = 0.13, F(17,186) = 2.60, p < 0.01.
QuantityVarietyCombined Quantity and Variety
βpβpβp
Gender−0.070.340.040.52−0.050.44
Age0.30<0.01−0.18<0.010.100.19
Instruction level0.23<0.01−0.010.910.200.01
Employment level<0.010.99−0.020.72−0.070.36
Affluence score0.080.35−0.030.700.060.47
Liking0.090.260.36<0.010.29<0.01
FCQ—Mood0.090.28−0.060.390.070.36
FCQ—Sensory Appeal<0.010.980.130.090.090.28
FCQ—Natural Content0.120.220.010.950.070.46
FCQ—Health−0.060.550.25<0.010.080.41
FCQ—Convenience0.070.510.040.660.090.32
FCQ—Price−0.080.34−0.060.40−0.110.18
FCQ—Weight Control−0.090.35−0.040.60−0.090.33
FCQ—Familiarity0.070.510.010.900.070.48
FCQ—Ethical Concern0.100.230.060.390.080.34
DEBQ—Restraint0.090.280.030.670.070.34
Neophobia score−0.150.05−0.120.06−0.170.02
Significant predictors are emboldened.
Table
Table 5. Results of the regression analyses using demographic characteristics and all liking and attitude variables to predict quantity, variety and combined quantity and variety scores in Italian participants (n = 152). Regression equations: Quantity: R = 0.46, R2 = 0.21, adjusted R2 = 0.12, F(16,151) = 2.28, p = 0.01; Variety: R = 0.64, R2 = 0.41, adjusted R2 = 0.34, F(16,151) = 5.78, p < 0.01; Combined quantity and variety: R = 0.59, R2 = 0.34, adjusted R2 = 0.27, F(16,151) = 4.41, p < 0.01.
Table 5. Results of the regression analyses using demographic characteristics and all liking and attitude variables to predict quantity, variety and combined quantity and variety scores in Italian participants (n = 152). Regression equations: Quantity: R = 0.46, R2 = 0.21, adjusted R2 = 0.12, F(16,151) = 2.28, p = 0.01; Variety: R = 0.64, R2 = 0.41, adjusted R2 = 0.34, F(16,151) = 5.78, p < 0.01; Combined quantity and variety: R = 0.59, R2 = 0.34, adjusted R2 = 0.27, F(16,151) = 4.41, p < 0.01.
QuantityVarietyCombined Quantity and Variety
βpβpβp
Gender−0.080.35−0.040.57−0.070.40
Age<0.010.99−0.070.40−0.040.68
Instruction level0.170.090.160.060.190.03
Employment level0.110.29−0.100.260.050.62
Affluence score0.040.670.040.660.030.74
Liking0.36<0.010.48<0.010.51<0.01
FCQ—Mood−0.040.67−0.100.29−0.060.56
FCQ—Sensory Appeal0.050.60−0.070.37−0.040.61
FCQ—Natural Content0.040.730.120.210.130.22
FCQ—Health−0.090.500.100.400.060.62
FCQ—Convenience------
FCQ—Price/Convenience−0.090.410.220.030.070.52
FCQ—Weight Control−0.110.41−0.110.34−0.190.13
FCQ—Familiarity−0.050.63−0.100.24−0.090.28
FCQ—Ethical Concern0.010.92−0.050.64−0.070.50
DEBQ—Restraint0.110.22−0.020.770.040.66
Neophobia score0.040.61−0.010.880.080.33
Significant predictors are emboldened.
Table
Table 6. Results of the regression analyses using demographic characteristics and all liking and attitude variables to predict quantity, variety and combined quantity and variety scores in UK participants (n = 158). Regression equations: Quantity: R = 0.36, R2 = 0.13, adjusted R2 = 0.03, F(17,157) = 1.26, p = 0.23; Variety: R = 0.49, R2 = 0.24, adjusted R2 = 0.15, F(17,157) = 2.64, p < 0.01; R = 0.43, R2 = 0.18, adjusted R2 = 0.08, F(17,157) = 1.85, p = 0.03.
Table 6. Results of the regression analyses using demographic characteristics and all liking and attitude variables to predict quantity, variety and combined quantity and variety scores in UK participants (n = 158). Regression equations: Quantity: R = 0.36, R2 = 0.13, adjusted R2 = 0.03, F(17,157) = 1.26, p = 0.23; Variety: R = 0.49, R2 = 0.24, adjusted R2 = 0.15, F(17,157) = 2.64, p < 0.01; R = 0.43, R2 = 0.18, adjusted R2 = 0.08, F(17,157) = 1.85, p = 0.03.
QuantityVarietyCombined Quantity and Variety
βpβpβp
Gender0.010.92−0.040.65−0.020.79
Age0.190.040.120.160.180.04
Instruction level0.020.84−0.070.43−0.010.89
Employment level−0.040.640.010.90−0.020.79
Affluence score0.120.190.070.410.110.24
Liking0.130.150.31<0.010.190.03
FCQ—Mood0.050.600.030.730.070.48
FCQ—Sensory Appeal0.070.490.140.140.100.30
FCQ—Natural Content−0.090.40−0.020.88−0.100.34
FCQ—Health0.240.050.140.240.280.02
FCQ—Convenience−0.180.20−0.170.18−0.210.11
FCQ—Price0.040.72−0.090.360.030.76
FCQ—Weight Control−0.090.380.190.05−0.020.84
FCQ—Familiarity−0.110.36−0.200.09−0.190.12
FCQ—Ethical Concern0.020.770.010.960.040.66
DEBQ—Restraint−0.020.870.020.80−0.010.95
Neophobia score0.010.960.150.110.050.63
Significant predictors are emboldened.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Appleton, K.M.; Dinnella, C.; Spinelli, S.; Morizet, D.; Saulais, L.; Hemingway, A.; Monteleone, E.; Depezay, L.; Perez-Cueto, F.J.A.; Hartwell, H. Consumption of a High Quantity and a Wide Variety of Vegetables Are Predicted by Different Food Choice Motives in Older Adults from France, Italy and the UK. Nutrients 2017, 9, 923. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu9090923

AMA Style

Appleton KM, Dinnella C, Spinelli S, Morizet D, Saulais L, Hemingway A, Monteleone E, Depezay L, Perez-Cueto FJA, Hartwell H. Consumption of a High Quantity and a Wide Variety of Vegetables Are Predicted by Different Food Choice Motives in Older Adults from France, Italy and the UK. Nutrients. 2017; 9(9):923. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu9090923

Chicago/Turabian Style

Appleton, Katherine M., Caterina Dinnella, Sara Spinelli, David Morizet, Laure Saulais, Ann Hemingway, Erminio Monteleone, Laurence Depezay, Federico J. A. Perez-Cueto, and Heather Hartwell. 2017. "Consumption of a High Quantity and a Wide Variety of Vegetables Are Predicted by Different Food Choice Motives in Older Adults from France, Italy and the UK" Nutrients 9, no. 9: 923. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu9090923

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop