11- to 13-Year-Old Children’s Rejection and Acceptance of Unfamiliar Food: The Role of Food Play and Animalness
Abstract
:1. Introduction
1.1. Background
1.2. Aim of the Study
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Study Design
2.2. Participants
2.3. Setting and Materials
2.3.1. Setting
2.3.2. Materials
2.4. Data Collection
2.5. Data Analysis
3. Results
3.1. Inclusion of Tactile Exercise: Impact on Rejection and Acceptance Continuum Mechanisms
3.1.1. Metatheme Rejection: Disgust, Distaste, and Inappropriateness
- QNP:
- Before starting the deboning, they have to remove the remaining feathers from the quail. Several only touch the quail with their fingertips or only with tweezers. Many of the children do not want to touch the quail with their other hand (to hold the quail steady on the cutting board) (School 2D, 21).
- QP:
- As they are about to cut off the quail’s head, a girl holds her hands over her quail’s eyes so it will not see it (School 1A, 60).
- BNP:
- A boy says to a girl: ‘just f****** touch it’. The girl replies: ‘it smells’ (School 3F, 100).
3.1.2. Metatheme Acceptance: Curiosity, Person/Pet, Familiarity, Liking
- QNP:
- ‘If you didn’t know what you were eating, you would eat it quickly’. Response: ‘WE ARE EATING!’ (said in an accusing manner) (School 2D, 59).
- BP:
- Tasting the pesto: A girl tastes the pesto while another girl reminds her that it has seaweed in it. The girl who is tasting covers her mouth with her hand as if in surprise and replies: ‘the aftertaste is actually very good’ (School 4G, 184–187).
3.2. Animal—Nonanimal Origin: Impact on Rejection and Acceptance Continuum Mechanisms
3.2.1. Metatheme Rejection: Inappropriateness, Disgust, and Distaste
- AG:
- ‘I really feel sorry for it’ (School 1B, 20).
- AG:
- ‘If you cut off its head, you are an animal abuser’ (School 2D, 4).
- AG:
- A girl looks at the quail before starting to debone: ‘YUCK! It is a little bird’ (School 1A, 71).
- NAG:
- Preparation of pesto: Group 2 begins to blend their pesto. They scream when the bladderwrack makes noises: ‘YUCK!’, ‘what is this?’ (School 4H, 76).
- AG:
- ‘I do not want dead bird on me’ (School 2C, 47).
- NAG:
- Group opens the oven and agree that it is smelly (from the bladderwrack chips). They really do not like the smell (School 3F, 73).
3.2.2. Metatheme Acceptance: Curiosity, Pet/Person, Familiarity, Liking
- AG:
- During food printing: ‘This is Jens, and this is Birgitte. They are married’ (School 1A, 31).
- AG:
- During the deboning, a girl finds an egg in her quail. She takes the head of the quail, which has been cut off earlier, and shows the egg to the head, saying: ‘congratulations, you have become a father!’ (School 1A, 83).
- NAG:
- After washing the bladderwrack, a boy says: ‘it is not that gross anymore’ (School 3E, 43).
- AG:
- While eating, a child says: ‘You don’t think about what you have done’ (School 2D, 56).
4. Discussion
4.1. Tactile Exercise and Food Play
4.2. The Inappropriate (Unfamiliar) Meal: Animalness and Not Food
5. Conclusions and practical application
5.1. Conclusions
5.2. Practical Application: Food Literacy and Health Promotion
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A
Quail—Print (n = 30) | Quail—No Print (n = 38) | Bladderwrack—Print (n = 29) | Bladderwrack—No Print (n = 32) | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Rejection | Inappropriate: Ideational: (1) feeling sorry for; (2) it is an animal | Inappropriate: Ideational: (1) feeling sorry for; (2) it is an animal | Inappropriate: Ideational—not food | Inappropriate: Ideational—not food |
Distaste: Sensory properties: touch | Distaste: Sensory properties: visual, touch | Distaste: Sensory properties: smell, touch, visual, sound, taste | Distaste: Sensory properties: smell, touch, visual, sound, taste | |
Disgust: Sensory properties: touch, smell, sound, contamination, ideational—it is an animal | Disgust: Sensory properties: touch, smell, sound, contamination, ideational–it is an animal | Disgust: Sensory properties: touch, smell, contamination | Disgust: Sensory properties: touch, smell, contamination | |
Acceptance | Liking: Sensory properties: visual, taste | Liking: Sensory properties: visual, smell, taste, Like it, but the animal dilemma | Liking: Sensory properties: touch, visual, smell, taste | Liking: Sensory properties: touch, visual, smell, taste |
Curiosity: Exploration (1) in general; (2) related to play; (3) related to exploring taste | Curiosity: Exploration (1) in general; (2) related to play; (3) related to exploring taste | Curiosity: Exploration (1) in general; (2) related to play; (3) related to exploring taste | Curiosity: Exploration (1) in general; (2) related to play; (3) related to exploring taste | |
Personification/petification: making up small stories | Personification/petification: making up small stories | |||
Familiarity: Comparing with known food, transformation from animal to food | Familiarity: Comparing with known food, transformation from animal to food | Familiarity: Comparing with known food | Familiarity: Comparing with known food |
Metatheme/Theme | Essence |
---|---|
1. Rejection Inappropriate, disgust, and distaste | The metatheme ‘rejection’ as a concept concerns observed behavior and dialogue reducing liking and willingness to taste or eat a food item [30]. Inappropriateness, in this case, refers to two different ideational mechanisms. One of these is based on the fact that it is not food or that it is an animal (the idea of it not being food or being an animal/that it had a life can lead to rejection due to an imagined transfer of contamination and/or cultural inappropriateness) [30,53,62]. The other is based on a respect/”feeling sorry for” paradigm [30]. Disgust refers to contamination: a fear of being soiled by either touching or being near what is perceived as (animal body) waste products [51], sensory properties: a dislike of, for example, smell, touch, and visual cues combined with elements of either inappropriateness, contamination or ideational rejection [63]. Ideation related to disgust refers to it being an animal, which promotes a strong display of emotions [30]. Distaste refers to an affective hedonic sensory-driven rejection reaction (e.g., smell, touch, taste, appearance, texture, sound) [30]. |
2. Acceptance Curiosity, person/pet, familiarity, and liking | The metatheme ‘acceptance’ as a concept concerns the promotion of a willingness to taste the food, but it can then be rejected [29]. Observed behavior and dialogue related to curiosity driven by exploration of an unfamiliar/relatively unfamiliar object. Curiosity driven by exploration is defined as a willingness to engage and investigate without fear but with a degree of uncertainty being present [64,65]. In this case, exploration relates to play (playing with the food in general), investigation, and taste (trying a novel food). Secondly, acceptance is related to the theme personification/petification driven by making up small stories about the quail/bladderwrack. Thirdly, familiarity is a theme related to comparisons with known foods and the transformation from raw material/animal to a familiar food. The fourth theme, liking, relates to positive affective hedonic sensory-driven acceptance reactions (e.g., touch, taste, appearance, smell) [29,30]. |
References
- World Health Organization. World Health Statistics 2018: Monitoring Health for the SDGs, Sustainable Development Goals; World Health Organization: Geneva, Switzerland, 2018; ISBN 978-92-4-156558-5.
- Sundhedsstyrelsen. Børn Og Unges Sundhed Og Trivsel; Sundhedsstyrelsen: Copenhagen, Denmark, 2019; ISBN 978-87-7014-102-4. [Google Scholar]
- Agirbasli, M.; Tanrikulu, A.M.; Berenson, G.S. Metabolic Syndrome: Bridging the Gap from Childhood to Adulthood. Cardiovasc. Ther. 2016, 34, 30–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Umer, A.; Kelley, G.A.; Cottrell, L.E.; Giacobbi, P.; Innes, K.E.; Lilly, C.L. Childhood Obesity and Adult Cardiovascular Disease Risk Factors: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis. BMC Public Health 2017, 17, 683. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- De Cosmi, V.; Scaglioni, S.; Agostoni, C. Early Taste Experiences and Later Food Choices. Nutrients 2017, 9, 107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- World Health Organization. Report of the Commission on Ending Childhood Obesity; World Health Organization: Geneva, Switzerland, 2016; ISBN 978-92-4-151006-6.
- Arla Fonden. Børn, Unge Og Mad 2020—Børneanalyse. 2020. Available online: https://assets.website-files.com/5e2ff55f9d703b58c5c38716/5e57997f552cf46ebf92f609_Wordrapport_børneanalyse.pdf (accessed on 28 February 2023).
- Arla Fonden. Børn, Unge Og Mad 2022—Børneundersøgelse. 2022. Available online: https://assets.website-files.com/5e2ff55f9d703b58c5c38716/628636a16eea945e12e246ff_BUM%20-%20B%C3%B8rneanalyse.pdf (accessed on 28 February 2023).
- Chu, Y.L.; Farmer, A.; Fung, C.; Kuhle, S.; Storey, K.E.; Veugelers, P.J. Involvement in Home Meal Preparation Is Associated with Food Preference and Self-Efficacy among Canadian Children. Public Health Nutr. 2012, 16, 108–112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Larson, N.I.; Story, M.; Eisenberg, M.E.; Neumark-Sztainer, D. Food Preparation and Purchasing Roles among Adolescents: Associations with Sociodemographic Characteristics and Diet Quality. J. Am. Diet. Assoc. 2006, 106, 211–218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Laska, M.N.; Larson, N.I.; Neumark-Sztainer, D.; Story, M. Does Involvement in Food Preparation Track from Adolescence to Young Adulthood and Is It Associated with Better Dietary Quality? Findings from a 10-Year Longitudinal Study. Public Health Nutr. 2012, 15, 1150–1158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Allirot, X.; da Quinta, N.; Chokupermal, K.; Urdaneta, E. Involving Children in Cooking Activities: A Potential Strategy for Directing Food Choices toward Novel Foods Containing Vegetables. Appetite 2016, 103, 275–285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hersch, D.; Perdue, L.; Ambroz, T.; Boucher, J.L. The Impact of Cooking Classes on Food-Related Preferences, Attitudes, and Behaviors of School-Aged Children: A Systematic Review of the Evidence, 2003–2014. Prev. Chronic Dis. 2014, 11, E193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Muzaffar, H.; Metcalfe, J.J.; Fiese, B. Narrative Review of Culinary Interventions with Children in Schools to Promote Healthy Eating: Directions for Future Research and Practice. Curr. Dev. Nutr. 2018, 2, nzy016. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Utter, J.; Fay, A.P.; Denny, S. Child and Youth Cooking Programs: More Than Good Nutrition? J. Hunger Environ. Nutr. 2017, 12, 554–580. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vidgen, H.A.; Gallegos, D. Defining Food Literacy and Its Components. Appetite 2014, 76, 50–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Palumbo, R.; Adinolfi, P.; Annarumma, C.; Catinello, G.; Tonelli, M.; Troiano, E.; Vezzosi, S.; Manna, R. Unravelling the Food Literacy Puzzle: Evidence from Italy. Food Policy 2019, 83, 104–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cullen, T.; Hatch, J.; Martin, W.; Higgins, J.W.; Sheppard, R. Food Literacy: Definition and Framework for Action. Can. J. Diet. Pract. Res. 2015, 76, 140–145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Pendergast, D.; Garvis, S.; Kanasa, H. Insight from the Public on Home Economics and Formal Food Literacy. Fam. Consum. Sci. Res. J. 2011, 39, 415–430. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bandura, A. Self-Efficacy Mechanism in Human Agency. Am. Psychol. 1982, 37, 122–147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bandura, A. Self-Efficacy: Toward a Unifying Theory of Behavioral Change. Psychol. Rev. 1977, 84, 191–215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Truman, E.; Lane, D.; Elliott, C. Defining Food Literacy: A Scoping Review. Appetite 2017, 116, 365–371. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rosas, R.; Pimenta, F.; Leal, I.; Schwarzer, R. FOODLIT-PRO: Food Literacy Domains, Influential Factors and Determinants—A Qualitative Study. Nutrients 2020, 12, 88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Højer, R.; Wistoft, K.; Frøst, M.B. Yes I Can Cook a Fish; Effects of a Five Week Sensory-Based Experiential Theme Course with Fish on 11- to 13- Year Old Children’s Food Literacy and Fish Eating Behaviour—A Quasi-Experimental Study. Food Qual. Prefer. 2021, 92, 104232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rozin, P.; Fallon, A. The Psychological Categorization of Foods and Non-Foods: A Preliminary Taxonomy of Food Rejections. Appetite 1980, 1, 193–201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rozin, P.; Fallon, A.E. A Perspective on Disgust. Psychol. Rev. 1987, 94, 23–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Martins, Y.; Pliner, P. “Ugh! That’s Disgusting!”: Identification of the Characteristics of Foods Underlying Rejections Based on Disgust. Appetite 2006, 46, 75–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Brown, S.D.; Harris, G. Disliked Food Acting as a Contaminant during Infancy. A Disgust Based Motivation for Rejection. Appetite 2012, 58, 535–538. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Rozin, P.; Vollmecke, T.A. Food Likes and Dislikes. Annu. Rev. Nutr. 1986, 6, 433–456. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Rozin, P.; Fallon, A. The Acquisition of Likes and Dislikes for Foods; National Academies Press (US): Washington, DC, USA, 1986. [Google Scholar]
- Egolf, A.; Siegrist, M.; Hartmann, C. How People’s Food Disgust Sensitivity Shapes Their Eating and Food Behaviour. Appetite 2018, 127, 28–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Sick, J.; Højer, R.; Olsen, A. Children’s Self-Reported Reasons for Accepting and Rejecting Foods. Nutrients 2019, 11, 2455. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Højer, R.; Wistoft, K.; Frøst, M.B. Play with Your Food and Cook It! Tactile Play with Fish as a Way of Promoting Acceptance of Fish in 11- to 13-Year-Old Children in a School Setting—A Qualitative Study. Nutrients 2020, 12, 3180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Coulthard, H.; Williamson, I.; Palfreyman, Z.; Lyttle, S. Evaluation of a Pilot Sensory Play Intervention to Increase Fruit Acceptance in Preschool Children. Appetite 2018, 120, 609–615. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Coulthard, H.; Thakker, D. Enjoyment of Tactile Play Is Associated with Lower Food Neophobia in Preschool Children. J. Acad. Nutr. Diet. 2015, 115, 1134–1140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Coulthard, H.; Sealy, A. Play with Your Food! Sensory Play Is Associated with Tasting of Fruits and Vegetables in Preschool Children. Appetite 2017, 113, 84–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nederkoorn, C.; Theiβen, J.; Tummers, M.; Roefs, A. Taste the Feeling or Feel the Tasting: Tactile Exposure to Food Texture Promotes Food Acceptance. Appetite 2018, 120, 297–301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ministry of Food, Agriculture, and Fisheries of Denmark. Danish Veterinary and Food Administration. The Official Dietary Guidelines—Good for Health and Climate, 1st ed.; Ministry of Food, Agriculture, and Fisheries of Denmark: Copenhagen, Denmark, 2021; ISBN 978-87-93147-44-7. [Google Scholar]
- Yin, R.K. Case Study Research Design and Methods, 4th ed.; Sage Publications Ltd.: New York, NY, USA, 2009; ISBN 9781412960991. [Google Scholar]
- Eistrup, A.; Nyby, T.K.; Hansen, S.L.; Gade, S. (Eds.) Børnerådet Håndbog i Børneinddragelse; Børnerådets Sekretariat, 2016; ISBN 978-87-90946-36-4. Available online: https://www.boerneraadet.dk/media/1alcqxat/brd_ha-ndbog_i_boerneinddragelse_2016_web.pdf (accessed on 28 February 2023).
- Baggett, P.; Shaw, E. The Art and Science of Gyotaku: There’s Somethin’ Fishy Goin’ On Here … Sci. Act. Classr. Proj. Curric. Ideas 2008, 45, 3–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Da Costa, E.; Domingues, P.; Melo, T.; Coelho, E.; Pereira, R.; Calado, R.; Abreu, M.H.; Domingues, M.R. Lipidomic Signatures Reveal Seasonal Shifts on the Relative Abundance of High-Valued Lipids from the Brown Algae Fucus Vesiculosus. Mar. Drugs 2019, 17, 335. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Bryman, A. Social Research Methods; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2016; ISBN 978-0-19-968945-3. [Google Scholar]
- Banks, M. Using Visual Data in Qualitative Research; Flick, U., Ed.; Sage Publications Ltd.: New York, NY, USA, 2007; ISBN 978-0-7619-4979-4. [Google Scholar]
- Gibbs, G. Analyzing Qualitative Data; Flick, U., Ed.; Sage Publications Ltd.: New York, NY, USA, 2015; ISBN 978-0-7619-4980-0. [Google Scholar]
- Guest, G.; MacQueen, K.; Namey, E. Applied Thematic Analysis; Sage Publications Inc.: New York, NY, USA, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Ogden, J.; Roy-Stanley, C. How Do Children Make Food Choices? Using a Think-Aloud Method to Explore the Role of Internal and External Factors on Eating Behaviour. Appetite 2020, 147, 104551. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Puddephatt, J.-A.; Keenan, G.S.; Fielden, A.; Reaves, D.L.; Halford, J.C.G.; Hardman, C.A. ‘Eating to Survive’: A Qualitative Analysis of Factors Influencing Food Choice and Eating Behaviour in a Food-Insecure Population. Appetite 2020, 147, 104547. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Martin Romero, M.Y.; Francis, L.A. Youth Involvement in Food Preparation Practices at Home: A Multi-Method Exploration of Latinx Youth Experiences and Perspectives. Appetite 2020, 144, 104439. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Braun, V.; Clarke, V. Using Thematic Analysis in Psychology Using Thematic Analysis in Psychology. Qual. Res. Psychol. 2006, 3, 77–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Angyal, A. Disgust and Related Aversions. J. Abnorm. Soc. Psychol. 1941, 36, 393–412. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Traynor, M.; Moreo, A.; Cain, L.; Burke, R.; Barry-Ryan, C. Exploring Attitudes and Reactions to Unfamiliar Food Pairings: An Examination of the Underlying Motivations and the Impact of Culinary Education. J. Culin. Sci. Technol. 2021, 19, 115–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Martins, Y.; Pliner, P. Human Food Choices: An Examination of the Factors Underlying Acceptance/Rejection of Novel and Familiar Animal and Nonanimal Foods. Appetite 2005, 45, 214–224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vonthron, S.; Perrin, C.; Soulard, C.-T. Foodscape: A Scoping Review and a Research Agenda for Food Security-Related Studies. PLoS ONE 2020, 15, e0233218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Stanton, R.R. The Disneyfication of Animals; The Palgrave Macmillan Animal Ethics Series; Palgrave Macmillan: Cham, Switzerland, 2021; ISBN 978-3-030-49316-5. [Google Scholar]
- Stewart, K.; Cole, M. The Conceptual Separation of Food and Animals in Childhood. Food Cult. Soc. 2009, 12, 457–476. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McGuire, L.; Palmer, S.B.; Faber, N.S. The Development of Speciesism: Age-Related Differences in the Moral View of Animals. Soc. Psychol. Personal. Sci. 2022, 14, 194855062210861. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nielson, S.E.; Skouw, S.; Olsen, A. Serving Style Preferences for Various Meal Arrangements among Children. J. Sens. Stud. 2018, 33, e12445. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fallon, A.E.; Rozin, P.; Pliner, P. The Child’s Conception of Food: The Development of Food Rejections with Special Reference to Disgust and Contamination Sensitivity. Child Dev. 1984, 55, 566. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dohle, S.; Rall, S.; Siegrist, M. I Cooked It Myself: Preparing Food Increases Liking and Consumption. Food Qual. Prefer. 2014, 33, 14–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- van der Horst, K.; Ferrage, A.; Rytz, A. Involving Children in Meal Preparation. Effects on Food Intake. Appetite 2014, 79, 18–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rozin, P.; Fallon, A.; Augustoni-Ziskind, M.L. The Child’s Conception of Food. The Development of Contamination Sensitivity to “Disgusting” Substances. Dev. Psychol. 1985, 21, 1075–1079. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pliner, P.; Pelchat, M.L. Neophobia in Humans and the Special Status of Foods of Animal Origin. Appetite 1991, 16, 205–218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Berlyne, D.E. Novelty and Curiosity as Determinants of Exploratory Behavior. Br. J. Psychol. 1950, 41, 68–80. [Google Scholar]
- Berlyne, D.E. Curiosity and Learning. Motiv. Emot. 1978, 2, 97–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Categorization * | Exercise Phase | Observational Points |
---|---|---|
Animal/seaweed | (1) Introduction to the quail/bladderwrack. | Reactions: display of acceptance, rejection, curiosity, skills, social interaction, others. |
(2) Initial physical contact with quail/ bladderwrack. | ||
Non-animal/not seaweed | (3) Tactile exercise (For the two no-print exercise observations, see point 4). | |
Animal/seaweed-food | (4) Food preparation. Quail: a. deboning, b. stuffing/cooking Bladderwrack: a. cutting into small pieces, b. cooking. | |
Food | (5) The meal: tasting. |
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. |
© 2023 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
Højer, R.; Aaslyng, M.D. 11- to 13-Year-Old Children’s Rejection and Acceptance of Unfamiliar Food: The Role of Food Play and Animalness. Nutrients 2023, 15, 1326. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu15061326
Højer R, Aaslyng MD. 11- to 13-Year-Old Children’s Rejection and Acceptance of Unfamiliar Food: The Role of Food Play and Animalness. Nutrients. 2023; 15(6):1326. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu15061326
Chicago/Turabian StyleHøjer, Rikke, and Margit Dall Aaslyng. 2023. "11- to 13-Year-Old Children’s Rejection and Acceptance of Unfamiliar Food: The Role of Food Play and Animalness" Nutrients 15, no. 6: 1326. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu15061326
APA StyleHøjer, R., & Aaslyng, M. D. (2023). 11- to 13-Year-Old Children’s Rejection and Acceptance of Unfamiliar Food: The Role of Food Play and Animalness. Nutrients, 15(6), 1326. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu15061326