The associations of vegetable consumption with food mavenism, personal values, food knowledge and demographic factors

Background: Poor dietary choices, in particular low consumption of fruits and vegetables are associated with the prevalence of diet related diseases. Ways to increase consumption are urgently required. This paper examines the associations of demographic, psychographic and food knowledge variables with reported vegetable consumption. Methods: An online questionnaire was administered in late 2012 to a national sample 2146 Australians who were selected to represent the Australian population in terms of age, sex, education and location of residence. It was divided into sections which assessed food knowledge, food involvement, food mavenism, personal values and personality factors, demographic characteristics and reported consumption of 13 vegetables and the total number of servings of vegetables per day. Principal components analyses of the individual vegetable consumption ratings derived three forms of vegetable consumption scores. These and total serving per day were used as dependent variables in a structural equation model to identify pathways between them and their likely antecedents. Major findings: Three types of vegetable consumption were formed:. Salad vegetables (onion, tomato and lettuce);. Dinner vegetables (carrot, peas and beans); and 'Green' vegetables (cabbage, spinach broccoli and cauliflower). Food mavenism, food knowledge, food involvement and equality-universalist values mediated the relationships between demographics and conscientiousness and the vegetable consumption variables. Conclusions: The three types of vegetable consumption and total servings per day were associated with different antecedent pathways. The mediating roles of food mavenism, food knowledge, food involvement and equality-universalist values may present opportunities for health promotion and the horticultural industry to increase population vegetable intake. Further research is required to test these associations via experimental and longitudinal studies and qualitative investigation of the meaning and place of the three forms of vegetable consumption in people's daily lives is recommended.

Socioeconomic inequalities in fruit and vegetable intakes

Socioeconomic position (SEP) refers to an individual’s social and economicranking within society based on access to resources (such asmaterial and social assets, including income, wealth, and educational credentials)and prestige (ie, an individual’s status in a social hierarchy, linkedfor instance to their occupation, income, or education level) (Krieger et al.,1997). Individual SEP can be measured using a variety of indicators whichcommonly include education, occupation, and income (Galobardes et al.,2006). Composite measures are frequently used when examining neighborhoodlevel measures of SEP and are commonly created by combining censusdata on a range of indicators.

Shopsmart 4 health: results of a randomized controlled trial of a behavioral intervention promoting fruit and vegetable consumption among socioeconomically disadvantaged women

BACKGROUND: Behavioral interventions show potential for promoting increased fruit and vegetable consumption in the general population. However, little is known about their effectiveness or cost-effectiveness among socioeconomically disadvantaged groups, who are less likely to consume adequate fruit and vegetables. OBJECTIVE: This study investigated the effects and costs of a behavior change intervention for increasing fruit and vegetable purchasing and consumption among socioeconomically disadvantaged women. DESIGN: ShopSmart 4 Health was a randomized controlled trial involving a 3-mo retrospective baseline data collection phase [time (T) 0], a 6-mo intervention (T1-T2), and a 6-mo no-intervention follow-up (T3). Socioeconomically disadvantaged women who were primary household shoppers in Melbourne, Australia, were randomly assigned to either a behavior change intervention arm (n = 124) or a control arm (n = 124). Supermarket transaction (sales) data and surveys measured the main outcomes: fruit and vegetable purchases and self-reported fruit and vegetable consumption. RESULTS: An analysis of supermarket transaction data showed no significant intervention effects on vegetable or fruit purchasing at T2 or T3. Participants in the behavior change intervention arm reported consumption of significantly more vegetables during the intervention (T2) than did controls, with smaller intervention effects sustained at 6 mo postintervention (T3). Relative to controls, vegetable consumption increased by ∼0.5 serving · participant(-1) · d(-1) from baseline to T2 and remained 0.28 servings/d higher than baseline at T3 among those who received the intervention. There was no intervention effect on reported fruit consumption. The behavior change intervention cost A$3.10 (in Australian dollars) · increased serving of vegetables(-1) · d(-1)CONCLUSIONS: This behavioral intervention increased vegetable consumption among socioeconomically disadvantaged women. However, the lack of observed effects on fruit consumption and on both fruit and vegetable purchasing at intervention stores suggests that further investigation of effective nutrition promotion approaches for this key target group is required. The ShopSmart 4 Health trial was registered at www.isrctn.com as ISRCTN48771770.