Download Department of Food Business and Development Discussion

Department of Food Business and Development
Discussion Paper Series
Health Issues, Diet and “Lighter Foods”:
An Exploratory Consumer Study
By
Joe Bogue and Christopher Ritson
Agribusiness Discussion Paper No. 31
October 2000
Department of Food Business and Development
National University of Ireland, Cork
Ireland
Ollscoil na hEireann, Corcaigh – National University of Ireland, Cork
2
Table of Contents
Abstract ........................................................................................................................ 3
Section 1: Introduction................................................................................................. 4
1.1 Consumer trends and healthy eating.................................................................. 4
1.2 Diet and health .................................................................................................. 5
1.3 Health messages and the consumer ................................................................. 10
1.4 Lighter foods ................................................................................................... 11
Section 2: New Product Development and Lighter Foods......................................... 12
2.1 NPD and lighter foods..................................................................................... 12
2.2 Labelling issues ............................................................................................... 15
Section 3: Research Objectives and Methodology..................................................... 16
3.1 Research objectives ......................................................................................... 16
3.2 Research methodology: focus groups.............................................................. 17
3.3 Focus group procedures................................................................................... 17
3.4 Focus group analysis ....................................................................................... 19
Section 4: Results, Discussion and Conclusions........................................................ 19
4.1 Focus group profiles........................................................................................ 19
4.2 Food concerns ................................................................................................. 21
4.3 Awareness of health messages and healthy eating .......................................... 23
4.4 Consumer perceptions of lighter food products .............................................. 27
4.5 Consumer concerns regarding lighter food products....................................... 29
4.6 Consumption of lighter foods.......................................................................... 30
4.7 The role of lighter foods in the diet................................................................. 30
4.8 Product descriptors for lighter foods ............................................................... 31
4.9 Price of lighter foods ....................................................................................... 33
4.10 Light dairy products ...................................................................................... 34
4.11 Appropriateness and occasion of use ............................................................ 36
4.12 Light milk products ....................................................................................... 37
4.13 Light cheese products .................................................................................... 37
4.14 Light yoghurt products .................................................................................. 38
4.15 Focus group questionnaire............................................................................. 39
Section 5: Main Research Findings and Conclusions................................................ 41
Conclusions................................................................................................................ 41
Suggestions for future research.................................................................................. 45
Appendix 1................................................................................................................. 46
Appendix 2................................................................................................................. 47
References ………………………………………………………………………….. 46
3
Health Issues, Diet and “Lighter Foods”:
An Exploratory Consumer Study
Joe Bogue, Department of Food Business and Development, National University of Ireland,
Cork, Ireland.
Christopher Ritson, Department of Agricultural Economics and Food Marketing, University
of Newcastle-upon-Tyne, Newcastle, NE1 7RU, UK.
Abstract
Healthy eating has become one of the most important food trends over the last two decades. It
has resulted from factors such as increased consumer awareness of health issues, the
identification of scientific links between diet and health, the publication of reports that have
recommended healthier diets, and the increased cost of health care. This paper reports on the
findings of a qualitative consumer study conducted in May 1999. Consumers’ awareness of
health issues and their consumption of light foods was examined by means of six focus
groups. Consumers’ awareness of the various health messages was in general low but there
was considerable variation across socio-economic groups. There was a certain mistrust of
“light” products, and "moderation" was a key factor that guided consumers in their daily food
choice. Consumers had a positive perception of dairy products but consumer acceptance of
lighter versions of dairy products varied. The participants had accepted reduced-fat milks and
reduced-fat yoghurts as part of their diets but reduced-fat cheeses were not acceptable
because of their sensory attributes. Consumers were not prepared to pay extra for these
lighter products. From a nutritional education perspective, this research revealed the need for
more effective health messages targeted at consumers across different socio-economic and
age groups. The health messages need to be educational with scientific back-up and run in
conjunction with other interventions to change dietary behaviour.
4
Section 1: Introduction
1.1 Consumer trends and healthy eating
Healthy eating has become one of the most significant consumer food trends over the
1980s and ‘90s. It has resulted from factors such as increased consumer awareness of
health issues, the identification of scientific links between diet and health, reports that
recommended healthier diets, and the increased cost of health care to governments.
There has also been higher levels of media coverage of novel foods, health foods and
health education issues.
This health trend has acted as a catalyst for increased levels of product development
activity in the lighter1 foods sector. As a consequence of this, the food industry has
spent increased amounts on food ingredient research for lighter foods. This has led to
the development of an array of new ingredients such as fat substitutes, fat mimics and
sweeteners (Pszczola, 1996). As Katz (1998a) argued, food manufacturers now must
have a low-fat or fat free entry on the shelf, alongside their regular products. The
complexity of developing fat substitutes for lighter products was illustrated by the
development of the “low fat no fat” product Olestra. It took 25 years to develop this
product, with 120 scientific studies and the input of 20,000 consumers, before it
received Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval (Tuley, 1997).
Although healthy eating is a very significant food trend, obesity is still a major public
health problem for many developed countries and also in Eastern countries such as
China and Japan (British Nutrition Foundation, 1999). Nutrition education remains a
5
priority policy issue for public health bodies and national governments, as medical and
scientific information identifies further evidence of linkages between various aspects
of diet and health.
Anderson (1994) defines nutrition education as:
"the process by which we assist people in making decisions regarding their
eating practices by applying knowledge from nutrition science about the
relationship between diet and health" Anderson (1994) p. 1828
As Anderson (1994) argues, a model of nutrition education is required, not just
information transfers to the consumer. This includes strategies such as electronic
media supported by the print media and the use of various channels to change
consumers’ dietary behaviour. Healthy eating benefits impact not only on the
individual but also have societal benefits, particularly in the reduction of health care
costs.
1.2 Diet and health
Influences on dietary behaviour have been identified as physiological factors, sociodemographic factors, behavioural and lifestyle factors, and knowledge and attitude
factors (Guthrie, 1994). Armitstead (1998) documented the changes in attitude to
health and food from concern over specific ingredients in the mid-1980s, to concern
over specific foods in the late 1980s and early 1990s.
As the 1990s progressed
consumer concerns focused on the healthiness of the diet as a whole, rather than the
individual constituents of the diet. As Wheelock (1992) reported, nutritional
deficiencies have been rare in the developed world, unless consumers excluded food
1
In this report “lighter foods” refers to food products with lower amounts of fat, sugar or sodium than the regular products.
6
products for economic, personal or religious reasons.
7
Kearney et al. (1997) reported, from a pan-European Survey, that 70 per cent of
Europeans believed that there was no need to change their diets. This has major
implications for nutrition education programmes. It may indicate that these consumers
have already made changes to their diets or, more seriously, are not interested in their
diet and related health issues. Kearney et al. (1997) also concluded that a single panEuropean healthy eating programme would be unlikely to be effective for all
countries. This was due to the variation in attitudes across countries observed in the
survey.
Research on obesity in England in 1996 found that 16 per cent of men and 18 per cent
of women were obese (Prescott-Clarke and Primatesta, 1998). Irish figures revealed
that just over 10 per cent of a random sample was obese, with 32 per cent overweight
(SLAN, 1999)2. There has also been strong epidemiological evidence that linked
obesity with health risks and the greater the degree of obesity and the younger the
person the greater their risk, relative to normal-weight controls (BNF, 1999). The
problems of obesity are compounded by cigarette smoking, alcohol intake and low
levels of physical exercise.
While levels of obesity increase, the sales of dietary products and meal replacements
for weight loss and weight control have grown to $6.8 billion from $4.7 billion in
1996 (Datamonitor, 2000). Food manufacturers have repositioned these products not
just for those overweight, but also for “weight maintenance”. For example, products
such as Slim Fast, produced by the Slim Fast Food Company Florida, have been
positioned for weight loss, weight maintenance, good nutrition and for healthy
lifestyles.
2
B.M.I. is an index to assess the degree of overweight or obesity and is calculated by using the equation
8
weight (kg) ÷ [height (m)2]. The British Nutrition Foundation’s Obesity report considered a BMI of over 25 overweight and a
BMI of over 30 obese (British Nutrition Foundation, 1999).
9
In terms of the Irish diet, the SLAN (2000) report revealed that less than half the Irish
population were eating satisfactory quantities of cereals, grains and potatoes; only a
fifth consumed the recommended daily Irish food pyramid guide of 3 servings of milk,
cheese and yoghurt. This is a significant finding particularly in relation to
osteoporosis, where it is been estimated that 1 in 4 women and 1 in 20 men will suffer
a fracture by the age of 60 years, due to osteoporosis (National Dairy Council, 1999a).
To aid in the planning of their daily food choices, consumers are advised to use guides
such as the Food Pyramid devised by the United States Department of Agriculture
(USDA) (Health Promotion Unit, 1998). They are advised to consume foods at the top
of the pyramid such as confectionery, cakes and high fat snacks sparingly. Food
products such as bread, cereals and potatoes at the base of the pyramid should be
consumed more frequently. Consumers are also advised to reduce the average amount
of food energy derived from saturated fatty acids, due to associated health problems
such as heart disease, diabetes, cancer and stroke (Hollingsworth, 1996).
Excessive storage of fat comes exclusively from dietary fat and it is also less satiating
than protein or carbohydrate. US consumers have been specifically advised to limit
their fat intake to 30 per cent of total calories (Best, 1991; Sheng et al., 1996).
However, a US survey found that consumers generally liked high-fat dairy products
regardless of the label information and perceived risk (Light et al., 1992). Where diets
have been reported to contain less than 15 per cent of fat calories, such as in Oriental
societies, heart disease levels have been particularly low. Despite major education
programmes in the US their diet is still rich in fat and low in some nutrient-dense
10
foods, with obesity a major public health problem (Katz, 1998b). Reduction of refined
sugar is also necessary as it contains only energy without proteins, minerals or
vitamins (Wheelock, 1992).
Barriers to the adoption of reduced-fat diets were reported by Lloyd et al. (1995).
These barriers included the reduction in taste quality, increased costs, lack of family
support and an inability to judge the fat content of diets. A significant development in
recent years has been the launch of medical internet sites. These sites offer consumer
advice on healthy eating and lifestyle issues with weekly bulletins offering health
education updates. The information includes on-line BMI calculations, person specific
exercise programmes and lifestyle and dietary questionnaires (Drkoop, 2000).
1.3 Health messages and the consumer
Consumer awareness of the links between diet and health has increased due to the
active promotion of healthy eating through public health programmes. Despite these
health promotion campaigns, cardiovascular disease remains the biggest single cause
of death in the world, accounting for 50 per cent of total deaths (Sheehy and
Morrissey, 1998). A survey of Irish consumers showed they were aware of the links
between diet and health and had made changes to their diets accordingly (Bogue et al.,
1999). However, Anderson (1994) argued that the issue that confronted consumers
was the combined effect of a change in their overall diet and lifestyle. This was
perceived to be more beneficial than merely encouraging consumers to choose
between specific products, such as butter or margarine.
The awareness of healthy eating has also grown as medical and nutritional research
further identified the links between diet and cancer, coronary heart disease, obesity
11
and stroke. The risks associated with these diseases can be influenced by changes in
food consumption behaviour and lifestyle. However, results from an Irish national
survey concluded that high-energy foods were over consumed by 84 per cent of the
respondents. Young people, particularly males, remained the highest consumers of fat
(SLAN, 1999). However, surveys have also shown that consumers are often sceptical
about the role of diet in heart disease, and in particular fat (National Nutrition
Surveillance Centre, 1997).
Awareness and knowledge of the links between diet and health has been found to be
varied across socio-economic groups. For example Lappalainen et al. (1998), in a pan
European survey, found that “older, less educated respondents, were consistently less
likely to mention any aspects of a healthy diet than those who had a university
education.” A report on the dietary habits of the Irish population corroborated this and
concluded that there were socio-economic variations in the population with respect to
food choice and consumption. The less affluent had a less healthy diet overall (SLAN,
1999). Australian research carried out by Turrell (1997) found that respondents in a
welfare sample were less knowledgeable than tertiary educated counterparts about
food and nutrition. In the US a higher incidence of obesity has also been found in the
lower socio-economic groups (Lachance, 1994)
1.4 Lighter foods
With increasing healthcare costs, foods such as lighter foods, health enhancing foods
and functional foods have a central part to play in the treatment, alleviation and
prevention of diseases. There is also the need to reduce the high dependence on drugs
due to various diet related health conditions (O’ Doherty, 2000).
Certain food
manufacturers have identified business opportunities that have satisfied consumer
12
demand for lighter products such as those with lower levels of fat or calories.
Consumer motivations for increased consumption of lighter foods have included the
need to avoid an increase in weight and preventative effects for certain illnesses
(Viaene and Gellynck, 1997).
Mela (1997) defined reduced-fat foods as typically containing at least 25 per cent less
fat per weight than standard versions of the same product. Altschul (1993) used a
more simple definition and suggested that reduced-fat and reduced-calorie foods
differed from the regular products as they contained fewer calories and less sugar and
fat per portion. Narhinen et al. (1999) defined "healthy choices" as products with
reduced amounts of salt and fat, especially saturated fats, compared to standard
products.
Market research has highlighted the shift to lighter eating and a healthier lifestyle and
this has resulted in the increased consumption of lighter foods in terms of calorie or
fat reduction (Sloan, 1995; Ralph et al., 1996; Viaene and Gellynck, 1997).
Grijspaardt-Vink (1996) reported that demand for low fat or fat free foods has been
low in Europe, although consumer awareness of the links between diet and health was
high. In France, Italy and Spain there has been relatively little demand for lighter
products due to consumer requirements of taste and authenticity, rather than fat
reduction (Hilliam, 1995).
Section 2: New Product Development and Lighter foods
2.1 NPD and lighter foods
There are many interacting influences on food choice. These include the intrinsic or
13
sensory attributes; extrinsic factors due to consumer culture and behaviour towards the
product and other features of the competitive environment such as the marketing
variables (Randall and Sanjur, 1981). Therefore, the complexity of developing a
successful food product, that is acceptable to consumers, is not surprising. As
Armistead (1998) notes, attitudes to health and food change slowly over time.
Although the consumer may be aware of health concerns, other factors play a central
role in food choice such as price, children’s and other adults’ preferences and the ease
of preparation.
The market for lighter products is expected to grow with increased consumer demand
for variety and improved sensory character. The United Kingdom has been identified
as the biggest market in Europe for light products at £2bn (Hilliam, 1995). Viaene and
Gellynck (1997) identified the most popular light products in Belgium as dairy
products while the most popular light product categories identified on the Irish market
were dairy products, soft drinks and salad dressings (Bogue et al., 1999).
The challenge for the food industry is to remove the fat from foods and replace the fat
with ingredients that safely impart the flavour, texture and mouth feel associated with
fat (Pszczola, 1996). The disciplines of both marketing and sensory analysis have
central roles to play in defining key product attributes, and the specific trade-offs
consumers are prepared to make when choosing lighter foods (Bogue et al., 1999).
The earliest light products have been replaced with new improved products with new
ingredients, new manufacturing techniques and new processes. Products such as
Haagen-Dazs low-fat ice cream, launched in 1997, have met consumer expectations
by including the consumer in the process of New Product Development (NPD)
14
(Dwyer, 1998).
Fat plays a key role in the flavour, body, and texture, of food such as cheeses and its
removal can adversely affect the sensory attributes of the product (Drake and
Swanson, 1997). The vital functional role of fat can be seen in its contribution to
product taste and texture (Fields, 1996), in the development and release of many
flavours (Mela, 1997), in a product’s mouth feel, appearance and handling and storage
stability (Best, 1991). When the fat content is reduced the overall recipe may need to
change considerably in order to achieve an acceptable texture, flavour and shelf life
(Drewnowski et al. 1998). In parallel with this consumers are increasingly demanding
natural products, with little or no additives. This makes it technologically more
difficult to formulate such products, which are equivalent to the standard products, in
terms of taste, texture and appearance (O’ Donnell, 1993).
Bogue and Delahunty (1999) determined consumer preferences for a range of
Cheddar-type cheeses which included a reduced-fat variety. The research revealed that
consumers would purchase more reduced-fat cheeses if there was a significant
improvement in taste and texture. Sensory analysis corroborated these findings with a
reduced-fat Cheddar-type cheese achieving the lowest mean hedonic score of the
range of cheeses tested.
One of the main marketing problems with lighter products is consumer expectation
(Cardello, 1993). What does the consumer expect from lighter products compared to
the standard product? Tuorila et al. (1994) argue that consumers expect a fat-free
product automatically to taste worse that full-fat or high calorie products. Indeed, even
15
extended exposure to reduced-fat products does not automatically increase the liking
for the reduced-fat products from habitual consumers of full-fat products (Mela et al.,
1993). Cardello (1993) and Bogue et al. (1999) argue that new light products may
need to be marketed differently from their full fat or high calorie counterparts. To
market these products as derivatives may raise consumer expectations based on
consumers’ knowledge of the regular product.
2.2 Labelling issues
The labelling of food products is an important issue for consumers, particularly in
view of consumer expectations of lighter products. The labelling and correct use of
descriptors to denote reduced-fat and reduced-calorie products is a key issue in the
marketing of lighter products. The harmonisation of nutrient and health claims as
reference points is different in terms of analysis, such as per 100g per kg or per
100kcal per serving. Internationally there are also problems. For example "reducedfat" in the UK means a 25 per cent reduction compared with a standard product, and
"fat-reduced" in the US refers to a 50 per cent reduction.
With increased consumer interest in lighter products there have also been increased
opportunities for label abuse. There have been some abuses reported in terms of
labelling and the use of descriptors such as "healthy, "light", "fat free", "low fat", "low
calorie" or “90 per cent fat free”. Viaene and Gellynck, (1997) reported that some
consumers had lost confidence in the labelling of these products. Consumers have also
realised that lack of fat does not necessarily mean a lack of calories (Hollingsworth,
1996). This has become a significant food policy issue with regard to both the
labelling of food products and the amount of information offered.
16
In terms of descriptors for lighter products, research has shown the term “low fat” was
most popular with UK consumers, French consumers preferred “reduced-fat” and the
Germans had a slight preference for “lite” over “low-fat” or “reduced-fat” (Gelardi,
1992). Research by Bogue et al. (1999) found that female consumers preferred the
label “fat-free”, while male consumers preferred the term “healthy”.
Although the taste of light products is central to consumer acceptance, the question of
whether consumers are prepared to pay a premium for reduced-fat or reduced-calorie
products remains. French et al. (1997) found that by reducing the relative price of
low-fat snacks, sales volume increased significantly. This was achieved in the absence
of concurrent nutrition intervention education. An intervention to promote dietary
change, by promoting healthier options in retail outlets, has provided positive results
for health promotion agencies (Narhinen, 1999).
Section 3: Research Objectives and Methodology
3.1 Research objectives
The specific objectives relating to this research were fourfold: 1) an examination of
consumers’ perceptions of food in general and their attitudes to their diets; 2) the
identification of consumers’ awareness were of the various health messages generated
by the health education authorities and disseminated through various media; 3) an
examination of consumers’ attitudes to lighter foods, and specifically reduced-fat
dairy products; 4) the generation of information on dietary behaviour for health
education experts, health care personnel, the food industry and the media on issues of
diet and health.
17
3.2 Research methodology: focus groups
Focus groups were used to probe and explore in-depth consumers' perceptions of diet,
health and lighter foods. Jenkins and Harrison (1990) described focus groups as freeranging, non-directed group discussions in which particular issues or items provided
an axis or focus for the group.
Focus groups can be described as having three distinctive characteristics: focus groups
involve people in social interaction in a series of discussions; the purpose of focus
groups is to collect qualitative data from a focused discussion and focus groups are a
qualitative approach to gathering information (Krueger, 1994). Focus groups have
been found to be an excellent method of gathering rich qualitative information.
Focus groups offer many advantages in market research. They allow people to discuss
their true feelings, anxieties and frustrations as well as the depth of their convictions,
in their own words. Focus group interviews are also relatively fast and inexpensive
(Zikmund, 1997). Jenkins and Harrison (1990) remind us that a small group of
people, even those carefully recruited, is not a representative sample and therefore
findings from focus groups cannot be projected to the population as a whole.
However, according to DeNicola (1990), focus groups can be used following
quantitative research to provide further explanations for particular findings. Further to
this, Armitstead (1998) states that using questionnaires to measure attitudes to healthy
eating or diet can often be misleading. Consumers tend to over-claim with regard to
healthy eating and their diets. A focus group allows more probing of consumer
opinions on key issues where they are likely to over-claim.
3.3 Focus group procedures
18
The fieldwork consisted of six focus groups. Participants were recruited to provide a
wide representation of consumers from different socio-economic groupings.
Department of Food Economics researchers recruited all participants. Each focus
group lasted approximately one hour and thirty minutes and was tape-recorded and
later transcribed. Four focus groups were conducted in Cork City and two in Limerick
City. A focus group was arranged with a group of visiting American undergraduate
students to examine international differences in consumer perceptions and
consumption behaviour with regard to lighter foods. An experienced moderator
conducted these interviews and used a semi-structured interview schedule and
followed an established method outlined by Kreuger (1994) and Morgan (1998) (See
Appendix 1 for the focus group interview schedule ).
The interview schedule used by the moderator covered four main topics: consumers'
perceptions of diet, health and food products; perceptions and purchase behaviour
with regard to lighter products; perceptions of lighter dairy products; consumption of
lighter milks, cheddar-type cheeses and strawberry yoghurts.
Each focus group began with a general discussion about diet and healthy eating. The
discussion then focused on lighter food products and reduced-fat dairy products.
Samples of both full-fat and reduced-fat milks, Cheddar-type cheeses and strawberry
yoghurts, that had been purchased in local retail outlets, were used as prompts. The
products purchased reflected the range of products available on the Irish market. The
products were passed around among participants which encouraged discussion on
packaging, packaging design and product descriptors. Each participant completed a
short questionnaire at the end of the focus group. This information complemented the
19
information gained from the tape-recorded discussions (See Appendix 2 for focus
group questionnaire ). All participants were rewarded with a small payment for their
time and effort.
3.4 Focus group analysis
The analysis of the focus group interviews was carried out in two steps. First, each
tape-recorded focus group interview was transcribed. Second, these transcriptions
were summarised and comments made by the participants during the focus groups
were included in each summary. The focus groups transcriptions were coded and
indexed using the computer package Ethnograph v4.0™ (Qualis Research Associates,
1995). This computer programme facilitated the analysis of the data collected from the
qualitative research. The Ethnograph v4.0 ™ aided in the process of identifying
important findings, marking those findings and retrieving for further analysis.
Section 4: Results, Discussion and Conclusions
4.1 Focus group profiles
The focus group profiles are listed on Table 1. Three of the groups contained eight
participants and three had seven. Three were mixed gender while the other three
consisted exclusively of females. Focus Group 2 consisted of eight undergraduate
students from the USA.
Focus Groups 1, 2 and 6, which contained the younger profile participants, were very
open and participants were quick to get involved in the discussion. Some of the older
profile consumers were less confident on certain issues (Focus Groups 3, 4). As a
consequence more time was spent with these consumers to make them more relaxed.
20
As the discussion proceeded the older groups became more confident and the
discussion was more fluid. The group dynamic in Groups 3 and 4, where the age
profiles were mixed, was the best due to the mixture of viewpoints from older and
younger consumers, and the subsequent discussions that took place.
21
Table 1: Profile of the six focus groups (FG1 – FG6)
FG1
FG2
FG3
FG4
FG5
FG6
8
8
7
7
8
7
Age
18-24: 3
25-34: 5
18-24: 8
25-34: 4
35-44: 2
45-54: 1
25-34: 3
35-44: 2
45-54: 2
25-34: 8
18-24: 5
25-34: 2
Gender
Mixed:
6F 2M
Female: 8
Female: 7
Mixed:
5F 2M
Mixed:
4F 4M
Mixed:
3F 4M
C1, C2, D
C1
B, C1, D
A, B, C1, C2
C1, C2
B, C1
Marital
Status
Married: 3
Single: 4
Separated: 1
Single: 8
Married: 3
Single: 4
Married: 6
Single: 1
Single: 7
Separated: 1
Single: 7
Status
Younger
professionals/y
ounger
administrative
staff
Younger
American
undergraduate
students
Senior
administrative
staff/
housewives
Older
professionals
Younger
professionals
Postgraduate
students
/younger
professionals
Cork
Cork
Limerick
Limerick
Cork
Cork
Number
Socio-group
grading on
Occupation*
Location
*Occupation Groupings from Reynolds, J. (1991). Occupation groupings: a job dictionary, London:
Market Research Society, 2nd ed.
4.2 Food concerns
The focus groups began with a general discussion about the participant’s perceptions
of food products, the food industry and food safety issues. Participants across all focus
groups were slow at the outset to identify food issues of concern to them or even food
safety issues. Group 1 participants raised concerns about the consumption of chicken
and the dangers associated with its preparation and the way the product was cooked.
They were also cautious about beef particularly in relation to Bovine Spongiform
Encephalopathy (BSE) and other recent food scares. The ingredients used
by food manufacturers in processed foods were also a cause for concern. There was a
strong perception that there was a lack of nutrients in processed foods. However, other
consumers in this group expressed less interest and displayed a certain amount of
22
apathy towards food products and food safety issues:
“All these genetically modified things and BSE, I couldn’t care less about
them” FG 1
Group 2 had a different perspective on foods and the food industry. This group
consisted of American undergraduate students who had majored in agri-business at
Iowa State University. These consumers had a positive perception of the food industry
and food products. They felt that the foods produced and marketed in the United
States were of a high standard:
“Everything in the US is usually of a pretty high standard” FG 2
This attitude to food in Focus Group 2 seemed to be more positive than any of the
other focus groups. This emanated from the foods they consumed at home and the
context in which the food was consumed. The following statement was typical of the
attitude of these discussants:
“I love food. My family were based around food and everybody sat around the
table when I was little until I went off to school. That is where things got
accomplished, over food” FG 2
Group 4 respondents thought that food concerns reported in the media tended to be
“fads” and that each food issue was eventually replaced by a new one:
“ I feel you can’t be worrying about everything. One minute they are talking
about one thing and the next it’s something else. If I like the look of it, I eat it”
FG 4
Participants from Focus Group 5 liked their food and were more trusting of the food
industry than Focus Group 1. They were aware of the importance of eating a healthy
23
diet. Issues such as BSE and the Genetically Modified (GM) foods debate were not of
great concern to them. Focus Group 6 participants generally liked plainer foods but
were a little more concerned about foods in general after recent food scares. Typical
comments were:
“ In terms of GM foods, I would have less concerns because I think it’s [food]
fairly safe. However there just isn’t enough information out there” FG 6
“GM foods would be a concern at the moment because we don’t have enough
information on them” FG 6
The lack of information on GM foods was a significant issue with this group and
consumers seemed to have little knowledge of the main facts of the GM debate.
4.3 Awareness of health messages and healthy eating
The discussions on consumer awareness of the main health and diet messages revealed
that knowledge of these issues was quite low across the focus groups. Focus group
participants’ knowledge was sketchy. No consumer demonstrated a clear
understanding of the main health messages.
In Group 1 the main health messages that participants were aware of included "the
need to eat lots of fruit and vegetables each day" and "drink more milk". Only one of
the participants was aware that the focus group meeting coincided with Healthy-eating
Week. Although participants knew that they should eat more fruit and vegetables the
benefits of doing so were not generally clear to discussants:
“I do know that they [fruit and vegetables] are good for you. As for what they
24
[fruit and vegetables] would give you I wouldn’t be 100 per cent sure.” FG 1
“Eating foods in moderation” was a health message that consumers were familiar
with:
“Moderation is the bottom line. Messages about healthy eating I think have
been absorbed by people before this. I think it’s a welcome thing that more
products are available and it’s great to have the variety. I think most people are
coming to the point of view that a balanced nutritional diet is not so difficult”
FG 5
Consumers in Group 1 admitted they were not aware of many of the diet related
diseases such as arteriosclerosis or osteoporosis. Consumers were determined to eat
what they liked regardless of the consequences:
“I for one would not go looking at a package to see what’s in it or what’s not
in it or what it does or doesn’t do. I just eat it. I think that’s the mentality of a
lot of people in Ireland towards food” FG 1
Group 2 participants had a high awareness of health messages and in particular the
health message to drink more milk. All participants were aware of the US
advertisements for milk which have relied heavily on celebrities to endorse the
product.
At the participant’s home university in Iowa a dedicated university
department had the responsibility to disseminate health information to students. In
terms of getting the health message across to young consumers this seemed to have
achieved its objective. As a consequence this group was generally more aware of the
various health messages than participants in the other focus groups.
25
Focus Group 2 participant’s diets had changed because most of the students were
living away from home. The type of food they consumed had changed from what was
considered "home-made" to more convenient foods with less nutritional benefits.
Group 5, which consisted of young professionals, had also changed their diets due to
various factors. These included moving from the family home, travelling extensively,
experiencing new food cultures and eating out more frequently. One participant from
Group 5 presented an interesting contrast in food cultures. The participant revealed
that her diet in Germany, where she had worked for a number of years, was healthier
than her Irish diet. Her daily diet in Germany consisted of more portions of fruit and
salads while her Irish diet had a higher fast food component (Focus Group 5).
Group 3 respondents were aware of the health messages "to vary their diet" and "to
use the Food Pyramid when choosing what to eat". However, the overall group
consensus was that they were not very aware of the health messages, or if they were
aware they were not clear on the exact message disseminated by the various health
promotion bodies.
Group 4 were more aware of the main health messages such as "eating a balanced
diet" and "consumption of low fat foods". However, there was a negative reaction
among participants to lighter foods. The following quote was illustrative:
“I think you’re better off to eat less of the normal foods rather than more of the
95 per cent fat free ones. The same with the low fat yoghurts, they are full of
additives. I think you’re better off with one normal yoghurt instead of four fat
free ones. FG 4
There was also confusion at the information disseminated by scientists and food
26
experts particularly when there were dissenting voices amongst those in the scientific
community:
“I think it’s confusing because things that you thought were fine before now
aren’t and you are probably eating things now that you shouldn’t have eaten
before. It’s hard to keep track of it. There are so many different reports from
different universities and things that come out. Reports seem to get a lot of
attention if they come up with a new idea but these fade with time” FG 4
Group 5 discussants were aware of the health messages that promoted "consumption
of a balanced diet", "consumption of more fruit and vegetables" and "choosing a
healthy option when dining out". They were also aware of various health messages
promoted by the Irish Heart Foundation and which promoted the concept of a “healthy
heart”. This group was made up of consumers from the C1 socio-economic group and
consisted of younger professionals.
One participant in Group 5 mentioned tradition and its effect on healthy eating. Most
of the group identified with the sentiments expressed by the participant:
“ I think it is a generation thing. Our generation is going with more varied
foods whereas with my parents and grandparents it was the traditional Irish
dinner and the creamier the milk, the better” FG 5
These consumers had made an attempt to change their dietary behaviours and
frequently purchased healthy products. One participant suggested that there was
increased awareness of healthy options because of the increased levels of information
on the incidence of diet related diseases.
27
The health messages that focus group 6 participants were aware of included "to eat
more fruit and vegetables", "drink more water", "reduce meat consumption", "reduce
fat intake" and "the need to choose healthier cooking methods". There were
differences among the participants and the perceptions of their diets:
“I know I shouldn’t eat as much rubbish as I do. I prefer to exercise more than
cut out foods I like. I drink lower fat milk because I can’t tolerate the taste of
creamy things” FG 4
“I think that everything in moderation is probably best. If you like something
that’s not good for your health it’s better to have it, but a little less often than
normal” FG 6
“I am not a believer in eating something that doesn’t taste nice just because
you think it is good for you, a lot of it is psychological” FG 5
“I eat in the canteen everyday which is good wholesome fatty foods which I
love. I hate low fat foods. The more natural and fatty it is, the more I like it”
FG 6
There was a lack of knowledge of health issues among focus group discussants, such
as the need to control blood cholesterol levels and the dangers of osteoporosis. Apart
from television and in particular topical health programmes, which proved popular
with many of the focus group participants, the main source for health and dietary
information was magazines:
“Reading magazines, especially women’s magazines, there is always a section
on diets and health” FG 1
4.4 Consumer perceptions of lighter food products
Participants across all focus groups were not impressed by lighter foods available on
28
the supermarket shelves. Typical comments were:
“Some foods [reduced-fat foods] are just like cardboard” FG 2
“ I would much rather buy fruit and vegetables which are a lot cheaper than the
low fat foods and they are better for you and taste better” FG 2
“I think they [reduced-fat foods] taste so artificial. I would take a small
amount of the regular or else do without. I think they’re so chemically
oriented” FG 4
“I don’t like the taste of them. I think the normal ones taste better” FG 4
“ Low fat or low calorie foods wouldn’t mean very much to me. I would be
inclined to eat what I want to and then exercise, than simply depend on the
food to do it for me” FG 4
“It comes down to taste but I probably would go for the lower fat if I knew it
would taste just as good” FG 6
“You find that low fat products taste very bland and the texture is processed
and it’s drier. In yoghurt and the diet drinks you can still taste them after an
hour” FG 6
“It would take me a while to go back to light and diet foods because I have lost
all faith in them in terms of taste” FG 6
Taste was important to the participants and the perception that lighter products were
more “artificial” was evident from many of the discussions.
There were some consumers with more positive views and this highlighted the
different market segments:
“I think the low fat foods are so close to the originals. They are exactly the
29
same so I don’t know why people don’t eat low fat” FG 6
4.5 Consumer concerns regarding lighter food products
There were certain concerns relating to lighter foods particularly those reduced in fat
or calorie content. The main concerns related to the particular processing techniques
employed and the perceived artificial nature of the products:
“ I would presume if it is low-fat or low calorie they would have to be putting
something else in it to take out the fat” FG 1
“People increase their volume [of food] when they eat low fat foods” FG 6
“I would worry about them [reduced-fat foods] being over processed to get
them to taste similar” FG 6
There were identified differences between various light products:
“When you say low fat, people usually associate it with a certain amount of
processing to make it low fat whereas low calorie beer doesn’t have any added
products in it to make it lower calorie. It’s just like cereal…and that’s naturally
low fat. They didn’t have to do anything to it to make it low
fat” FG 6
There was a high level of cynicism pertaining to lighter foods:
“I think they [food manufacturers] are making all these products just because
people are getting fatter and eating more. They seem to think that if you eat
low fat butter somehow that’s going to make some miraculous change which it
isn’t. You have to look at your diet as a whole. I really think that you are better
off just having natural whole products rather than these things that have
30
reduced-fat” FG 3
“People think if they eat low fat food that they won’t have to bother
[exercising] and that will keep them healthy rather than anything else” FG 6
Participants judged the lighter foods in relation to taste only. They tended not to
mention the health aspect of these foods i.e. the reduction of fat or calorie content and
the importance of this in terms of dietary guidelines.
4.6 Consumption of lighter foods
Participants across all focus groups had consumed lighter dairy products of one variety
or another. Group 1 participants had also consumed low calorie beers while travelling
and working abroad, primarily in the United States. These participants found the light
beers acceptable in terms of taste and they had also consumed the healthy option
versions of ready-made meals. Other lighter products such as oven chips had gained
some degree of consumer acceptance:
“I feel if I am having chips at least they are low-fat and oven baked so they are
better than a plate of greasy chips” FG 1
Focus Group 2 participants consumed lighter versions of sour cream, crisps, yoghurts
and beer on a regular basis. Focus Group 2 participants perceived a small difference
in taste between the light beers and the regular beers but the difference was not so
great as to stop consumption.
4.7 The role of lighter foods in the diet
Some participants did not see a role for light products in their present diets but
suggested that these products may have a role to play in their diets at some stage in the
31
future:
“I don’t need yet to watch my diet or health so until the time comes that I will,
so be it” FG 1
“If I started to get obese, I would probably cut down and consume lighter
products” FG 2
“ If I was overweight they [reduced-fat foods] might have a role to play, but
I’m not, so I don’t think about it” FG 3
“Unless you are overdoing it and really eating a lot, then it’s worth it. But
really if you are taking everything in moderation I think a good healthy diet is
better” FG 3
“ I would try and stay away from foods that have to have a reduction [in fat or
calories]” FG 5
From a health education perspective this was interesting as the “head in the sand”
approach was prevalent across all focus groups. A healthy diet was not a priority for
most consumers. However, if health issues such as being overweight or obese did
arise in the future, then these products would have a role in the diet of these
consumers.
4.8 Product descriptors for lighter foods
Product descriptors have a key marketing role to play particularly in terms of
consumers’ acceptance of lighter products and ultimately their purchase behaviour.
Bogue et al. (1999) and Gelardi (1992) reported on the diverse product descriptors
preferred by consumers for lighter food products. In this study the acceptance of
product descriptors varied between focus groups. Focus group 3 rejected the product
32
descriptors “low-fat”, “no-fat” and “reduced-fat” in favour of the term “healthy”.
Typical comments included:
“No-fat has the best impact. Reduced: it’s like reduced from what” FG 2
“With the low-fat and no fat, they are taking out the fat but you don’t know
what they are putting in. The word “healthy” sounds to me as if it’s good for
you” FG 3
“I wouldn’t buy diet cheese as such. The word diet would put me off, it would
seem as if it had too many additives” FG 4
“Reduced-fat and healthy would attract me. They are positive. Diet and light
sound negative, they imply something else” FG 4
“The 100 per cent natural label would attract me” FG 4
“I like the term light instead of diet” FG 5
“To me diet means lack of taste” FG 5
The term “light” on food product labels proved to be quite puzzling to certain
consumers:
“I don’t like the term [light] because I have to get the regular product and the
light product and actually compare food labels” FG 2
“…when I hear the word light it doesn’t make that much impact on me: is it
lighter in calories or lighter in fat?” FG 2
Focus Group 4 did not like the term “diet”:
“The word fresh would attract me, rather than diet or light” FG 4
“I think light is a better term. Diet is a bit severe” FG 4
The discussion in Focus Group 4 unearthed an interesting issue in relation to
33
packaging design, which arose from discussions on the product prompts. Participants
pointed out that often the packaging design of lighter products was not as colourful or
vibrant as the standard products. The colours used on the packaging of lighter milks
and cheeses, light pinks and blues, gave an inferior image of the product to the
consumer:
“The lower fat milks are all in faded colour cartons. It’s like we [the
manufacturer] can’t give you as much colour as well as much fat, everything is
diluted” FG 4
“Why reduce on the colour and reduce on the attractiveness of the product on
the outside. You are implying that you are going to get a horrible tasting
product on the inside and that’s very important when you are buying
something” FG 4
4.9 Price of lighter foods
The concept of having to pay extra for lighter foods did not appeal to the Irish
consumers. However Government intervention to promote healthy eating by
subsidising lighter foods met with widespread approval:
“I think if the Government is serious about promoting health, they should
subsidise or cut the taxes on them [reduced-fat foods]” FG 1
Focus Group 2 participants were very price sensitive and this was reflected in terms of
their purchase behaviour. The participants found that in their home market lighter
products were more expensive that the standard products. The American consumers
were resigned to paying more for their reduced-fat and reduced-calorie products but
there were also dissenting participants:
34
“I think some people will pay the extra money to get the low-fat food no
matter what their income is” FG 2
“If you look at mayonnaise they have no-fat, light and regular and you can see
the prices go up. It doesn’t really make sense for them to be dearer. Especially
with the big kick trying to get Americans to reduce their fat intake and shape
up” FG 2
4.10 Light dairy products
In general consumers had a positive perception of dairy products and their role in a
healthy diet:
“I think dairy products are healthy. You need a certain amount in your diet. It
all depends on how much you eat with these things really” FG 3
“…..even though cheese would be very high in fat it would depend on how
much of it you would eat. It’s still to a certain extent a natural product. I don’t
think it should be tampered with. What’s there is there and taking the fat out of
it to me it’s taking some of the good out of it. It takes some of the nutrition out
of it.” FG 3
“Dairy products are fine in moderation but I think if you are eating a lot of
cheese and milk, it can’t be good for you” FG 6
The American consumers were more concerned that dairy products were high in fat
content (Group 2). There was confusion across many of the Irish focus groups on
whether milk was a high or low fat product. A number of Focus Group 4 participants
felt that milk was a low fat food and thus would not drink a reduced-fat version:
“I wouldn’t buy low fat milk because full fat milk is only about 3.25 per cent
35
fat and anything under 5 per cent is considered a low fat food …” FG 4
Focus Group 1 respondents stated that they would rather cut down on foods than
switch to the low-fat varieties of dairy products. Again taste was a key factor
explaining why consumers would not switch to lighter foods:
“I would try and cut down on what I eat than trying to go for low-fat spreads
because I don’t like the taste of them” FG 1
“Rather than buying a low fat spread and putting a load of it on your bread,
you can use just a tiny bit of butter and I think it is probably more healthy in
the long run” FG 1
“Generally low-fat foods don’t taste as well as the high calorie or high fat
content foods” FG1
“I think it is a flavour thing. If it doesn’t taste the same, I’m not going to eat it
no matter what happens” FG 6
Some participants had found lighter foods which they had found palatable:
“It takes a while to get used to these products especially in your cereal with
low fat milk, but then you get used to them” FG 1
“I have eaten lower fat crisps… there isn’t much difference in taste” FG 4
“I think everybody if they were sure that you could get the same taste from a
diet product then everybody would buy them” FG 5
“There are certain ones [reduced-fat products] such as ice-creams or weight
watchers and they are exactly alike so I’d eat them” FG 6
“I think we have to have milk for osteoporosis so I usually have the reducedfat milk every day with my cereal. You get used to it” FG 3
36
4.11 Appropriateness and occasion of use
The way consumers used lighter products, and at what times, gave some insight into
behaviour.
“If I am making something for somebody else, I will use the real cheese but if
I am making it for myself, then I use the low-fat” FG 2
“Some nights I would take it [fat free salad dressing] and other nights I would
go for the full-fat” FG 4
Other examples included consumption of lighter foods during mid-week and then
switching to more indulgent foods during the weekend. Dining out was also an excuse
to consume more indulgent foods.
When dining out many of the participants often opted for the less healthy option as a
treat:
“I will go out to a restaurant and eat full cream and have the full fat butter on
my bread but when I’m buying food for home I wouldn’t” FG 3
The influence of children on consumer's purchase behaviour was very evident among
the Irish focus group participants and the need to give children the full-fat options:
“I buy low-fat milk and cheese, yoghurt and butter. We also buy the full fat
products for the kids” FG 1
“I buy both, half and half. I give the younger child full fat and the others have
the low fat” FG 3
This is in accordance with dietary guidelines where consumers are told that “low fat
varieties of important foods such as milk cannot meet children’s vast energy needs”
37
(National Dairy Council, 1999b)
4.12 Light milk products
Most focus group participants had tried a low-fat dairy products option. However,
consumer acceptance varied across the focus groups. The most widely accepted
reduced-fat dairy product was milk. The full-fat version was perceived as much
stronger in taste than the reduced-fat versions (Groups 1 and 2):
“I would pay triple the price for skimmed milk. If it came down to all that was
available was whole milk, I would not drink milk” FG 2
“I would find the full-fat [milk] very creamy, very luscious” FG 4
“Occasionally I would have the full-fat but I find it very creamy” FG 4
“I drink low fat milk, but not because it is low in fat, but because I can’t drink
full fat [milk] as it makes me sick” FG 6
“The only one [reduced-fat product] I would use would be the milk and that’s
for the taste” FG 6
Many consumers attributed their dislike of full-fat milks to their childhood where they
were encouraged to consume full-fat milk on a regular basis by their parents.
4.13 Light cheese products
Reduced-fat cheese did not gain consumer acceptance in terms of taste:
“It [light cheese] doesn’t taste much different than full fat cheese but it has
light written all over it so I don’t know how much lighter it is than the full fat”
FG 1
“I wouldn’t buy low fat cheese. It has an interesting taste to it, like cardboard”
FG 5
38
“No [I would not buy cheese] because I really like cheese. I haven’t found a
low fat cheese that I like.” FG 5
In some of the discussions the idea of a reduced-fat cheese went against the whole
concept of cheese as an indulgent product to consumers:
“I buy low fat milk and low fat butter. Cheese is cheese and it’s there to enjoy.
Low fat yoghurts I would buy” FG 5
“The light versions of Cheddar cheese are like rubber. They don’t have the
same texture and flavour so I’d rather have one slice of one, than be able to
have two of the other” FG 6
Again the differences among consumers was evident where some consumers had
identified reduced-fat Cheddar-type cheeses that were acceptable:
“Only recently I found one [reduced-fat cheese] that measures up in taste to the
full-fat one” FG 3
4.14 Light yoghurt products
Lighter yoghurts were widely accepted by participants across the focus groups:
“I actually eat the diet yoghurt. They are still quite creamy” FG 3
“ I prefer low fat milk so I would consciously buy it. Yoghurts: I would eat
either but I would buy low fat if I had the choice. I wouldn’t buy low fat
cheese” FG 5
“I don’t like the taste of the full fat yoghurts anymore. I prefer the light
products” FG 4
“Yoghurt: I don’t eat much of it but if I do I get the lighter one but that would
be because of worrying about putting on weight more than thinking of heart
39
disease” FG 6
Overall the discussants had found the reduced-fat milks and yoghurts acceptable. Few
found the reduced-fat cheeses acceptable particularly in terms of taste and texture. The
functionality of reduced-fat cheeses was also questioned in that these cheeses were not
suitable for cooking with or melting for snacks.
4.15 Focus group questionnaire
The focus group participants were asked to complete a short questionnaire to detail
changes to their diets and their attitudes towards lighter food products. The results of
the focus group questionnaire can be seen on Table 2 (See appendix 2 for the focus
group questionnaire). Taste was an important influence on food purchases which was
evident across all focus groups. This was also highlighted when the discussants were
questioned on their consumption of lighter food products and when asked how they
rated these products compared to regular products. The main change to participant’s
diets was the reduction in the consumption of red meat. Improved sensory quality of
light products, with regard to their taste and texture, would have a strong bearing on
whether consumption levels of these products increased in the future.
40
Table 2: Focus group questionnaire results.
Main food purchase
influences
Low-fat, taste, price, familiarity, healthy, packaging, appearance, texture, place
of purchase (FG1)
Taste, price, organic, promotions, nutritional value, seasonal (FG2)
Presentation, value, fat content, appearance, taste, freshness, quality (FG3)
Freshness, naturalness, value, sell by date, taste, fat content, price, health
benefits, colour, smell (FG4)
Taste, price, quality, variety, freshness, nutritional value, healthy, origin,
convenience, variety, origin. (FG5)
Appearance, label, energy content, healthy, naturalness, freshness, nonprocessed, variety (FG6)
Main changes to diet
Increased amounts of low-fat products, more variety, reduced salt levels,
reduced sugar products (FG1)
Less meat, eat less, more white meat, less snacking, more fruit and vegetables,
eating more junk food (FG2)
Low fat, reduced sugar, reduced salt, more convenience, more fruit and
vegetables, less junk food, less processed food (FG3)
Less red meat, more pasta, more fruit and vegetables, more water, less coffee
and tea, more salads, increased amounts of low-fat products, more fish, more
chicken, more home produced foods, more high fibre cereals (FG4)
Less red meat, more fish, more salads, more water, increased low fat products,
increased fruit and vegetables, more rice and pasta, less cheese and bread, less
sugary products, smaller quantities, more balanced diet, more variety (FG5)
More variety, more reduced-fat products, more eating out, less red meat, more
pasta, rice and vegetables, more fish (FG6)
Current consumption
of light products and
ratings (selected
statements)
“Low-fat milk comparable but low-fat butter poor in taste”, “milk and butter
are poor but cheese is comparable”, “I buy none and I think they would be
tasteless” FG1
“Crisps, milk, sour cream and salad dressing”, “..the normal products are
usually better tasting and cheaper” (FG2)
“Milk is fine. Cheese: I’m still trying to find a comparable taste”, “Low fat
products do not compare in taste” (FG3)
“ (I consume) very few diet products because they taste very artificial and have
a lot more additives and “E” numbers” (FG4)
“I don’t buy reduced-fat cheese, it’s horrible” , “Milk and butter much better
than full fat and yoghurt tastes the same”(FG5)
“Taste could improve but some are similar” (FG6)
Future consumption
of light products
(Selected statements)
“Light products consumption will increase”, “Consumption will increase as I
get older”, “Consumption would increase if there was a better range..”(FG1)
“Consumption will increase as I get older in a more health conscious mind and
earn more money”, “I wouldn’t necessarily like to see a particular product with
reduced-fat, I would rather see improvements in the taste of the current low-fat
products” (FG2)
“Consumption is likely to increase” (FG3)
“I would like to see better tasting low fat foods”, “I do not rate light
products”(FG4)
“I would like to see a good reduced-fat cheese on the market”, “Consumption
will increase if the range and quality of light food improves” (FG5)
“Consumption of dairy products and alcohol to increase” , “(Consumption
will) increase if the taste improves”, “(Consumption will increase) if flavour
and texture is comparable to the original” (FG6)
41
Section 5: Main Research Findings and Conclusions
1.
There was a lack of consumer awareness of the main health messages.
2.
In general consumers were not worried about their diet and health at present.
3.
Consumers would rather cut down on the amounts of regular foods consumed,
than actually consume lighter versions of these products.
4.
There was a wide gulf in consumer knowledge of lighter foods and the actual
role these products can play in a healthy diet.
5.
The overall perception of lighter foods by focus group discussants was
negative. Lighter milks and yoghurts had gained consumer acceptance while
in general lighter cheeses had not gained acceptance from consumers.
6.
Product descriptors for lighter foods met with varying levels of consumer
acceptance.
Conclusions
This study reported on the results of a series of focus groups conducted to investigate
consumers' perceptions of healthy eating, knowledge of health messages and their
attitudes and purchase behaviour pertaining to lighter food products. The context in
which this research took place included increased world-wide obesity levels, increased
sedentary lifestyles and the increased variety and availability of indulgent foods
available on supermarket shelves.
One of the main conclusions of this research is the lack of consumer awareness of the
main health messages. “Everything in moderation” and “consumption of a healthy
diet” were the most well-known health messages. Even when consumers knew about
the need to consume a healthy food product they were unaware of the benefits of
doing so. Many consumers adopted a “ head in the sand” approach to their diets.
Focus group participants were not worried about their health and diet at
42
present. They agreed that they would take action if their weight changed or they
needed to change their diet in the future. Although the younger profile groups were
more aware of the health benefits, they did not seem to worry whether their diets were
healthy or not. This is a central issue in nutritional education. It is necessary to
communicate health messages clearly to consumers, in order to change dietary
behaviour.
Taste has a very important influence on food choice for the focus group participants.
Certain consumers would rather cut down the amounts of regular foods consumed
than actually consume a lighter version of that product. This is a critical issue
particularly for those who may be overweight, have high blood cholesterol, be prone
to high blood pressure or have a genetic disposition to cancer.
There seems to be a wide gulf between consumer knowledge of lighter foods and the
actual role these products can play in a healthy diet. Consumers need more
information on the links between diet and health. The fact that the American students
had more exposure and awareness of health messages was a significant finding.
Consumers at a younger age need to be targeted with health messages. This should
begin with primary schoolchildren. Its significance can be seen in the SLAN (1999)
report where the younger age group of both males and females consumed more fat.
One of the reasons why health education programmes to limit obesity have been
unsuccessful has been the need to balance the health messages with the need to reduce
problems associated with eating disorders (BNF, 1999). The most effective message,
through the most appropriate media channel, must be identified to target consumers
across all socio-economic and age groups. Consumer input in this process is vital for
its success.
43
Lighter food can often be more expensive than regular foods. A recent Irish
supermarket survey revealed that reduced-fat and reduced calorie products were more
expensive, across a wide range of food products, than their normal counterparts
(Holland, 1999). However by reducing the price of lighter foods, as in French et al.’s
(1997) survey on snack foods, overall consumption may increase. Marketing strategies
that aim to reduce the price of lighter foods for the lower socio-economic groups may
be beneficial particularly when run concurrently with nutritional education
programmes. How to operationalise such an intervention would be a matter for public
health agencies, food manufacturers and also the retail sector which has a crucial role
in new product success. An intervention in Finland to promote dietary changes proved
positive with a link up between health promotion agencies, product providers and the
retail sector (Narhinen, 1999).
The overall perception of lighter foods from the focus groups was negative. There was
a clear mistrust of the food industry and a key issue was raised, "If products are
reduced in fat, what is put in as a substitute at the processing stage"? For example a
Scottish study found that reduced-fat products such as cheeses were equated with “low
quality” (Jack et al., 1994). Consumers did not understand how lighter products had
changed during processing. In the present study there was a perception that eating the
standard product in moderation was a healthier alternative. Light et al., (1992)
suggested that the food industry needed to build trust with consumers if they hope to
minimise food consumption risks.
Products such as reduced-fat milks and yoghurts had gained a level of acceptance with
consumers. However, reduced-fat Cheddar-type cheese was not acceptable. It is a
44
major technological challenge for the food industry to produce a lighter Cheddar-type
cheese with sensory attributes similar to those of regular cheese. Cheddar-type cheese
differs from the milk or yoghurt in that it has a high fat content. Removing a high
percentage of this fat dramatically alters the product's sensory characteristics.
The product descriptors used by food manufacturers were also puzzling to consumers
and "natural" was a term that seemed to gain widespread acceptance across groups.
Hollingsworth (1996) found that the term “better for you” was a more widely accepted
descriptor than "diet" or "light". However, the diversity in terms of product descriptors
acceptable to different consumers highlights the difficulty in marketing such products.
From a product development perspective, consumers need to be reassured about
lighter foods and that these foods have a role to play in healthy eating. The success of
functional foods, health enhancing foods and the next generation of lighter foods will
depend on successful communication of their benefits to the consumer. As Sheehy and
Morrissey (1999) reported, consumers may not wish to change their diets but instead
consume healthy versions of the foods they normally consume. Products such as
functional foods which add beneficial ingredients (positive foods), may be perceived
as more natural foods that lighter food where ingredients are removed (minus foods).
Information on issues of diet, healthy eating and health enhancing foods needs to be
clear, educational and scientific and targeted at all sections of the community. It would
also be beneficial to generate health messages that integrate consumers’ diets with
their lifestyles. This would target the diet, the lifestyle and whether the consumer
engages in regular and vigorous physical exercise, in order to prepare an integrated
health plan for each consumer.
45
Suggestions for future research
This research was exploratory and a number of topics can be identified for future
research:
1.
It would be beneficial to examine the best ways in which public health messages
are disseminated effectively to consumers. The following issue may be raised:
how do consumer perceptions of health messages vary across socio-economic
groups and ages?
2.
The identification of the best media to utilise to most effectively convey the
healthy eating message to consumers. Do we need to use different promotional
strategies for different socio-economic groups?
3.
Another beneficial piece of research would be an examination of consumer
perceptions of the role of health enhancing foods and functional foods in
consumers' diets. This is an interesting issue particularly when consumers see
eating in moderation and eating a balanced diet as key aspects of remaining
healthy. Consumers may wish to modify their existing diets rather than using
vitamin supplements or fortified foods.
4.
What intervention models can be successfully used to increase consumer
awareness of issues relating to diet and health?
46
Appendix 1: Focus Group Interview Schedule
(Exploration of issues contributing to consumers’ acceptance of light products and
specifically reduced-fat dairy products)
Food Products
Main perceptions of food products, food & health, food safety issues
Awareness of the main health messages by different policy bodies
Awareness of the links between diet & health
How important is diet to remain healthy?
Do you examine product labels and what do you look for on product labels?
Has your diet changed in the last five years and in what way, by means of what information
sources?
What are the main factors that influence purchase of food products?
Light products
Quote: “We should think low-fat rather than diet”
Do light products have a role to play in the diet and remaining healthy?
General comments on these products light products
What products are you most familiar with on the market: beers, spreads, convenience meals,
desserts, crisps?
Which light products do you consume?
Main reasons for consuming light products
Have you increased your consumption of light products over the last five years?
Do you see a link between these products and certain health messages?
Perceptions and expectations of these products, are you satiated after eating these products
Perceptions of the main differences between these and conventional products
Would you pay a higher cost for these products versus conventional counterparts?
What would encourage you to purchase these products?
Is there any aspect of light products that cause you concern?
Light dairy products
Perceptions of dairy products in general
Do you consume light dairy products?
Why do you consume light dairy products?
What light dairy products are you most familiar with on the market: yoghurts, milks, cheese,
desserts?
What light dairy products are consumed most frequently?
How are they rated compared to their full-fat counterparts: taste, texture, appearance, mouth
feel, message, advertising?
Specific light dairy products
Have you consumed these products or similar: Milk, Cheese, and Yoghurt?
When you pick up reduced-fat dairy products what do you think: expectation of taste,
texture?
Perception of main differences
Appropriateness of use of the different products
Comment on product descriptor on each product: what do they suggest to you and which
would encourage purchase?
Labelling
Price
Promotion
Place
Any other comments
Questionnaire
Each person complete the short questionnaire
47
Appendix 2
Focus Group Questionnaire
(Group)
Gender:
M( )
Marital Status:
Married
Single
Separated
Divorced
Other
(
(
(
(
(
)
)
)
)
)
Age:
18-24
25-34
35-44
45-54
55-64
65+
(
(
(
(
(
(
)
)
)
)
)
)
Occupation:
or
F( )
________________________________________________
What are the most important influences when you purchase food products?
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
Have you changed your diet in the last five years? If so what changes have you made?
___________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________
What light products, if any, do you consume? How would you rate these products in
comparison to their full-fat counterparts?
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
Is your consumption of light products likely to increase or decrease in the future? If it will
increase what products would you like to see with a light counterparts?
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
48
References
Altschul, A.M. (1993). Fat in foods, In: Low Calorie Foods Handbook, (Altschul,
A.M., Ed.), Marcel Dekker: New York.
Anderson, J. (1994). What should be next for nutrition education? Future Nutrition
Education Directions, American Institute of Nutrition, 1828-1832
Armitstead, A. (1998). The National Health Survey - consumer attitudes to health and
food, Nutrition & Food Science, 2, March/April, 95-98.
Best, D. (1991). The challenges of fat substitution, Prepared Foods, May, 72-77.
Bogue, J., Delahunty, C. (1999). Market-oriented New Product Development:
Cheddar-type Cheese, Agribusiness Discussion Paper No. 23, Department of Food
Economics, University College Cork, Cork.
Bogue, J., Delahunty, C. and Kelleher, C. (1999). Market-oriented New Product
Development: Consumers’ Perceptions of Diet, Health and Their Consumption of
Reduced-fat and Reduced-calorie Foods, Agribusiness Discussion Paper No. 24,
Department of Food Economics, University College Cork, Cork.
British Nutrition Foundation. (1999). Obesity, The Report of the British Nutrition
Foundation Task Force, British Nutrition Foundation, Blackwell Science.
Cardello, A.V. (1993). What do consumers expect from low-cal, low-fat, lite foods?,
Cereal Foods World, 38, 2, 96-99.
Dwyer, S. (1998). Inextricably linked, Prepared Foods, February.
Datamonitor. (2000). Global Dietary Products, London: Datamonitor.
DeNicola, N. (1990). Debriefing sessions: the missing link in focus groups, Marketing
News, 24, 1, pp 20-22.
Drake, M. and Swanson, B. (1997). Silver bullets and low fat technologies, Prepared
Foods, June.
Drewnowski, A., Nordensten, K., and Dwyer, J. (1998). Replacing sugar and fat in
cookies: impact on product quality and preference, Food Quality and Preference, 9,
1/2, 13-20.
Drkoop.com. (2000). http://drkoop.com/.
Fields, D.M. (1996). The evaluation of taste of low-fat or fat-free snack foods: do
regular purchasers have an upward bias?, Journal of Food Products Marketing, 3, 3.
French, S.A., Jeffery, R.W, Story, M., Hannan, P. and Synder, M.P. (1997). A pricing
strategy to promote low-fat snack choices through vending machines, American
Journal of Public Health, 87, 5.
49
Gelardi, R.C. (1992). The European marketplace: Is the lite revolution going global?,
The Manufacturing Confectioner, April.
Grijspaardt-vink, C. (1996). Lowfat is Ho Hum in Europe, Food Technology, April.
Guthrie, J. (1994). Quantitative nutrition education research: approaches, findings,
outlook. Quantitative Nutrition Education Research, American Institute of Nutrition,
1813-1819.
Health Promotion Unit. (1998). A guide to healthy food choices, Health Promotion
Unit, Dublin: Department of Health and Children.
Hilliam, M. (1995). Cost-effective fat substitution: the taste of success, International
Food Ingredients, NR. 4, 27-31.
Holland, K. (1999). Fat lot of good, Irish Times, Saturday, May 1st.
Hollingsworth, P. (1996). The leaning of the American diet, Food Technology, 50, 4.
Jack, F.R., Piggott, J.R. and Paterson, A. (1994). Use and appropriateness in cheese
choice, and an evaluation of attributes influencing appropriateness, Food Quality and
Preference, 5, 281-290.
Jenkins, M. and Harrison, K.S. (1990). Focus groups: a discussion, British Food
Journal, 92, 9, 33-37.
Katz, F. (1998a). Fat-free, reduced-fat reach maturity, Food Technology, 52, 3.
Katz, F. (1998b). USDA surveys show what Americans eat, Food Technology, 52, 11.
Kearney, M., Gibney, M.J., Martinez, J.A., de Almeida, M.D.V., Friebe, D., Zunft,
H.J.F., Widhalm, K. and Kearney, J.M. (1997). Perceived need to alter eating habits
among representative samples from all member states of the European Union,
European Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 51, S30-S35.
Kreuger. R. (1994). Focus Groups: A Practical Guide for Applied Research, 2nd Ed.,
Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications.
Lachance, P.A. (1994). Human obesity –scientific status summary, Food Technology,
February.
Lappalainen, R., Kearney, J. and Gibney, M. (1998). A Pan EU survey of consumer
attitudes to food, nutrition and health: an overview, Food Quality and Preference, 9,
6, 467-478.
Light, A., Heymann, H. and Holt, D. (1992). Hedonic responses to dairy products:
effects of fat levels, label information, and risk perception, Food Technology, 46, 7.
Lloyd, H.M., Paisley, C.M. and Mela, D.J. (1995). Barriers to the adoption of reducedfat diets in a UK population, Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 95, 3, 316322.
50
Mela, D.J. (1997). Reduced-fat foods, What are they?, Institute of Food Research
Report, Institute of Food Research External Relations, Reading: Institute of Food
Research.
Mela, D.J., Trunck, F. and Aaron, J.I. (1993). No effect of extended home use on
liking for sensory characteristics of reduced-fat foods, Appetite, 21, 117-129.
Morgan, D.L. (1998). The Focus Group Guidebook 1, Thousand Oaks, California:
Sage Publications.
Narhinen, M., Nissinen, A. and Puska, P. (1999). Healthier choices in a supermarket:
the municipal food control can promote health, British Food Journal, 101, 2, 99-107.
National Dairy Council. (1999a). Dem bones, dem bones need calcium. Dublin:
National Dairy Council.
National Dairy Council. (1999b). How does your toddler grow? A nutrition guide for
1-5 year olds. Dublin: National Dairy Council.
National Nutrition Surveillance Centre. (1997). A Review of the Health Promotion
Framework for Action Nutrition Plan, National Nutrition Surveillance Centre,
National University of Ireland, Galway.
O’ Doherty, C. (2000), Superfoods due to add spice to your diet, The Irish Examiner,
April 4.
O' Donnell, C.D. (1993). Reduced-fat foods: still the no.1 formulation challenge,
Prepared Foods, December.
Prescott-Clarke, P. and Primatesta, P. (1998). Health Survey for England 1996,
London: HMSO.
Pszczola, D. (1996). Low-fat dairy products: getting a new lease on life, Food
Technology, September.
Qualis Research Associates. (1995). Ethnograph v4.0. The Ethnograph, A program
for the analysis of text based data.
Ralph, L., Seaman, C.E.A. and Woods, M. (1996). Male attitudes towards healthy
eating, British Food Journal, 98, 1.
Randall, E. and Sanjur, D. (1981). Food preferences – their conceptualisation and
relationship to consumption. Ecology of Food and Nutrition, 11, 151-161.
Reynolds, J. (1991). Occupation Groupings: A Job Dictionary, London: Market
Research Society, 2nd ed.
SLAN. (1999). Dietary Habits of the Irish Population: Results from SLAN, National
Nutrition Surveillance Centre Annual Report, Department of Health Promotion,
National University of Ireland, Galway.
51
Sloan, A.E. (1995). The skinny on a fat market, Food Technology, April.
Sheehy, P.J.A. and Morrissey, P.A.(1998). Functional foods: prospects and
perspectives in Nutritional Aspects of Food Processing and Ingredients, Henry, C.J.K
and Heppell, N.J. (Eds.), Gaithersburg: Aspen Publishers.
Sheng, M., Brochetti, D., Duncan, S.E. and Lawrence, R.A. (1996). Hedonic ratings of
reduced-fat food products: factors affecting ratings from female and male college-age
students, Journal of Nutrition in Recipe and Menu Development, 2, 2, 31-40.
Tuley, L. (1997). Low fat no fat, Food Manufacture, November.
Tuorila, H., Cardello, A.V. and Lesher, L.L. (1994). Antecedents and consequences of
expectations related to fat-free and regular-fat foods, Appetite, 23, 247-263.
Turrell, G. (1997). Educational differences in dietary guideline food practices: are they
associated with educational differences in food and nutrition knowledge?, Australian
Journal of Nutrition and Dietetics, 54, 1.
Viaene, J. and Gellynck, X. (1997). Consumer behaviour towards light products in
Belgium, British Food Journal, 99, 3, 105-113.
Wheelock, V. (1992). Healthy eating: the food issue of the 1990s, British Food
Journal, 94, 2.
Zikmund, W. (1997). Exploring Marketing Research, 6th Ed., London: The Dryden
Press.
52
Department of Food Business and Development
Agribusiness Discussion Papers
The Agribusiness Discussion Papers series is an externally refereed series of papers which report on
research conducted by staff of The Department of Food Business and Development, University College
Cork or associates. The following is a listing of the papers published to date:
No.
1. Keane, M and Lucey, D.I.F. (1984): “Positive M.C.A.’s and EEC Dairy Budget”.
2.
Keane, M. and Lucey, D.I.F. (1984) and Denis I.F. Lucey: “The U.K. Liquid Milk Sector and the Common Agricultural
Policy”.
3.
Keane, M. and Gleeson, P. (1985): “Optimising Herd Calving Patterns Under Milk Quota Constraints".
4.
Cahillane, C. (1986): “Land Reform in Ireland – The Objectives, The Process and Some Issues”.
5.
Keane, M. (1986): “Economies of Milk Transport – Co-op Charges, Key Efficiency Factors”.
6.
Keane, M. (1986): “Milk Seasonality, Pricing and Cheese Development”.
7.
Keane, M. (1987): “A Comparison of Winter Milk Incentive Schemes”.
8.
Keane, M. (1989): “Component Pricing of Milk – Principles and Practice”.
9.
Keane, M. (1990): “Producer Prices for Milk – Trends and Future Prospects”.
10. Keane, M. and Lucey D.I.F. (1991): “Irish Dairying – Modelling the Spatial Dimension”.
11. Keane, M. and Byrne, P. (1992): “Dairying in Hungary”.
12. Keane, M. and Byrne, P. (1992): “Dairying in Czechoslovakia”.
13. Keane, M. and Byrne, P. (1992): “Dairying in Poland”.
14. Keane, M. and Collins, A. (1995): “A Study of Dairy Policy Alternatives”.
15. Collins, A. and Oustapassidis, K. (1997): “Below Cost Legislation and Retail Performance”.
16. Enright, P.G. (1997): “National Regulation and the Changing Geography of the Irish Dairy Processing Industry”.
17. Keane, M. (1997): “Economies of Scale and Irish Cheese Manufacture”.
18. Enright, P.G. (1998): “Agri-processing Industries as a Vehicle for Rural Development: Case Studies of Two Rural
Communities in the Canadian Prairies”.
19. Collins, A. (1998): “The Irish Food Manufacturing Sector: Current Customer Portfolios in the Irish and UK Grocery
Markets”.
20. O’Reilly, S. and Shine, A. (1998): “Consumer attitudes to and use of Nutrition Labelling”.
21. McCarthy, M. and Barton, J. (1998): “Beef Consumption, Risk Perception and Consumer Demand for Traceability
along the Beef Chain”.
22. McCarthy, M., O’Reilly, S. and O’Sullivan, C. (1998): “An Investigation of the Effectiveness of the Domain Specific
Innovativeness Scale in the pre-identification of First Buyers”.
23. Bogue, J. and Delahunty, C. (1999): “Market-Oriented New Product Development: Cheddar-type Cheese”.
24. Bogue, J., Delahunty, C. and Kelleher, C. (1999): “Market-Oriented New Product Development: Consumers’
Perceptions of Diet and Health and their Consumption of Reduced-fat and Reduced-calorie Foods”.
25. McCarthy, M., and O’Reilly, S. (1999): “Beef Purchase Behaviour: Consumer Use of Quality Cues & Risk Reduction
Strategies – findings from Focus Group Discussions”.
26. McCarthy, M. (1999): “An Investigation of Consumer Perceptions towards Meat Hazards”.
27. Bogue, J. and Ryan, M. (1999): “Market-oriented New Product Development: Functional Foods and the Irish
Consumer”.
28. McCarthy M., O’Reilly S. & Cronin M. (2000): “A Profile of Irish Farmhouse and Continental Cheese Customers”.
29. Cronin M, McCarthy M. & O’Reilly S. (2000): “An Examination of Consumer Involvement in the Purchase of Cheese
Products”
30. Bogue, J. (2000): “New Product Development and the Irish Food Sector: A Qualitative Study of Activities and Processes.”
31. Bogue, J. & Ritson, C. (2000): “Health Issues, Diet and “Lighter Foods”: An Exploratory Consumer Study”
53
AVAILABLE (Price £3.50 each) from:
Department of Food Business and Development
University College Cork
Tel: 021-4902570 /4902076 Fax: 021-4903358
E-mail: [email protected]