IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v18y2021i6p2925-d516126.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Food Neophobia and Consumer Choices within Vietnamese Menu in a Polish Cohort Study

Author

Listed:
  • Dominika Guzek

    (Department of Food Market and Consumer Research, Institute of Human Nutrition Sciences, Warsaw University of Life Sciences (WULS-SGGW), 159C Nowoursynowska Street, 02-776 Warsaw, Poland)

  • Duy Nguyen

    (Department of Food Market and Consumer Research, Institute of Human Nutrition Sciences, Warsaw University of Life Sciences (WULS-SGGW), 159C Nowoursynowska Street, 02-776 Warsaw, Poland)

  • Dominika Głąbska

    (Department of Dietetics, Institute of Human Nutrition Sciences, Warsaw University of Life Sciences (WULS-SGGW), 159C Nowoursynowska Street, 02-776 Warsaw, Poland)

Abstract

One of the factors influencing consumer food choices is food neophobia (FN), described as a reluctance to try novel or unknown food products. The aim of the study was to determine the influence of FN on food choices in young Polish respondents through a web-based choice experiment with Vietnamese restaurant menu. The choice experiment was conducted using a Computer-Assisted Web Interview (CAWI) method in a sample of 601 young adults, while using a developed Vietnamese restaurant menu. For the dishes, neophobic potential for a Polish population was defined, based on content of ingredients not typical for Polish diet. The FN was assessed using the Food Neophobia Scale (FNS) by Pliner and Hobden. The neophobic potential was the determinant of choice of dishes ( p < 0.05). The participants characterized by a high FN level less commonly than others chosen dishes characterized by neophobic potential as: starter (Nem quõn—non-fried spring rolls with shrimps) ( p = 0.0003), soup (Mién gà—soup with cellophane noodles and nam huong mushrooms) ( p < 0.0001), main course (Phở xào bò—rice noodles with soy sauce and fish sauce) ( p < 0.0001) and dessert (Chè thập cãm—dessert of golden gram, black eye beans, Azuki beans and tapioca) than other options ( p = 0.0007). It was stated that FN in young respondents may reduce the frequency of choosing dishes containing unfamiliar ingredients and, as a result, it may cause lower diversity of consumed dishes. Taking into account that not properly balanced diets resulting from rejecting some types of products are becoming a growing problem, the FN should be taken into account in the general public health policy.

Suggested Citation

  • Dominika Guzek & Duy Nguyen & Dominika Głąbska, 2021. "Food Neophobia and Consumer Choices within Vietnamese Menu in a Polish Cohort Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(6), pages 1-13, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:6:p:2925-:d:516126
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/6/2925/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/6/2925/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Vikas Soekhai & Esther W. Bekker-Grob & Alan R. Ellis & Caroline M. Vass, 2019. "Discrete Choice Experiments in Health Economics: Past, Present and Future," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 37(2), pages 201-226, February.
    2. Małgorzata Lipowska & Ha Truong Thi Khanh & Mariusz Lipowski & Joanna Różycka-Tran & Mariola Bidzan & Thu Tran Ha, 2019. "The Body as an Object of Stigmatization in Cultures of Guilt and Shame: A Polish–Vietnamese Comparison," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(16), pages 1-17, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Shahida Anusha Siddiqui & Oscar Zannou & Ikawati Karim & Kasmiati & Nour M. H. Awad & Janusz Gołaszewski & Volker Heinz & Sergiy Smetana, 2022. "Avoiding Food Neophobia and Increasing Consumer Acceptance of New Food Trends—A Decade of Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-25, August.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Meixia Xu & Yifan Wang & Shuxin Yao & Rongju Shi & Long Sun, 2022. "One-Year Prevalence of Perceived Medical Errors or Near Misses and Its Association with Depressive Symptoms among Chinese Medical Professionals: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(6), pages 1-9, March.
    2. Óscar Brito Fernandes & Márta Péntek & Dionne Kringos & Niek Klazinga & László Gulácsi & Petra Baji, 2020. "Eliciting preferences for outpatient care experiences in Hungary: A discrete choice experiment with a national representative sample," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(7), pages 1-15, July.
    3. Ivan Tzintzun & Jonathan Sicsic & Lise Rochaix, 2023. "Into the Far West? Investigating Health Policy-Makers' Willingness to Adopt Decrementally Cost-Effective Innovations Using a DCE Approach," PSE Working Papers halshs-04154933, HAL.
    4. Nikita Arora & Matthew Quaife & Kara Hanson & Mylene Lagarde & Dorka Woldesenbet & Abiy Seifu & Romain Crastes dit Sourd, 2022. "Discrete choice analysis of health worker job preferences in Ethiopia: Separating attribute non‐attendance from taste heterogeneity," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(5), pages 806-819, May.
    5. Nicolas Jacquemet & Stéphane Luchini & Jason F. Shogren & Verity Watson, 2019. "Discrete Choice under Oaths," Documents de travail du Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne 19007, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1), Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne.
    6. Ricardo A. Daziano, 2022. "A choice experiment assessment of stated early response to COVID-19 vaccines in the USA," Health Economics Review, Springer, vol. 12(1), pages 1-16, December.
    7. John Buckell & Vrinda Vasavada & Sarah Wordsworth & Dean A. Regier & Matthew Quaife, 2022. "Utility maximization versus regret minimization in health choice behavior: Evidence from four datasets," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(2), pages 363-381, February.
    8. Conti, G.; & Giustinelli, P.;, 2022. "For Better or Worse? Subjective Expectations and Cost-Benefit Trade-Offs in Health Behavior: An Application to Lockdown Compliance in the United Kingdom," Health, Econometrics and Data Group (HEDG) Working Papers 22/14, HEDG, c/o Department of Economics, University of York.
    9. Brouwers, Jonas & Cox, Bianca & Van Wilder, Astrid & Claessens, Fien & Bruyneel, Luk & De Ridder, Dirk & Eeckloo, Kristof & Vanhaecht, Kris, 2021. "The future of hospital quality of care policy: A multi-stakeholder discrete choice experiment in Flanders, Belgium," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 125(12), pages 1565-1573.
    10. Huls, Samare P.I. & de Bekker-Grob, Esther W., 2022. "Can healthcare choice be predicted using stated preference data? The role of model complexity in a discrete choice experiment about colorectal cancer screening," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 315(C).
    11. Epstein, D.S. & Barton, C. & Mazza, D. & Woode, M.E. & Mortimer, D., 2020. "Patient chosen gap payments in primary care: Predictions of patient acceptability, uptake and willingness to pay from a discrete choice experiment," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 263(C).
    12. Ozdemir, Semra & Gonzalez, Juan Marcos & Bansal, Prateek & Huynh, Vinh Anh & Sng, Ban Leong & Finkelstein, Eric, 2024. "Getting it right with discrete choice experiments: Are we hot or cold?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 348(C).
    13. Zhang, Jinsui & Hu, Min & Jia, Yusheng & Gu, Yuanyuan & Chen, Wen, 2024. "How should regulatory schemes be optimized to enhance deterrence against medical insurance fraud by enrollees? Evidence from a discrete choice experiment in China," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 354(C).
    14. Kettlewell, Nathan & Walker, Matthew J. & Yoo, Hong Il, 2024. "Alternative Models of Preference Heterogeneity for Elicited Choice Probabilities," IZA Discussion Papers 16821, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    15. Anders Dugstad & Kristine Grimsrud & Gorm Kipperberg & Henrik Lindhjem & Ståle Navrud, 2020. "Scope elasticity and economic significance in discrete choice experiments," Discussion Papers 942, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    16. Shimelis Araya Geda & Rainer Kühl, 2021. "Exploring Smallholder Farmers’ Preferences for Climate-Smart Seed Innovations: Empirical Evidence from Southern Ethiopia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-17, March.
    17. Pestana, Joana & Frutuoso, João & Costa, Eduardo & Fonseca, Filipa, 2024. "Heterogeneity in physician's job preferences in a dual practice context – Evidence from a DCE," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 343(C).
    18. Sydenham, Rikke Vognbjerg & Jarbøl, Dorte Ejg & Hansen, Malene Plejdrup & Justesen, Ulrik Stenz & Watson, Verity & Pedersen, Line Bjørnskov, 2022. "Prescribing antibiotics: Factors driving decision-making in general practice. A discrete choice experiment," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 305(C).
    19. Tomasz Gajderowicz & Maciej Jakubowski & Sylwia Wrona & Ghadah Alkhadim, 2023. "Is students’ teamwork a dreamwork? A new DCE-based multidimensional approach to preferences towards group work," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-13, December.
    20. Abdulrahman S. Alamri & Stelios D. Georgiou & Stella Stylianou, 2023. "Construction of symmetric paired choice experiments: minimising runs and maximising efficiency," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-12, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:6:p:2925-:d:516126. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.