Journal of the Korean Society of Food Culture (한국식생활문화학회지)

Korean Society of Food Culture (한국식생활문화학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Measuring the Causal Relationship among Factors Influencing Attitude toward Meat and Consumption Behavior

육류에 대한 태도와 소비행동에 영향을 미치는 요인들의 인과관계 평가

  • Kang, Jong-Heon (Department of Cooking Science, Sunchon National University) ;
  • Jeong, Hang-Jin (Department of Cooking Science, Sunchon National University)
  • Published : 2008.06.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The objective of this study was to evaluate the causal relationships among environmental belief, ambivalence, subjective norm, attitude and meat consumption behavior. A total of 318 questionnaires were completed. A structural equation model was employed to assess the causal effects of constructs. The results of the study demonstrated that the structural analysis results for the data also indicated excellent model fit. The effects of environmental belief, ambivalence, and subjective norm on attitude were statistically significant. The effects of environmental belief, subjective norm and attitude on meat consumption were statistically significant. The effects of attitude on intention were statistically significant. As had been expected, intention exerted a significant effect on meat consumption. Moreover, environmental belief and ambivalence exerted significant indirect effects on meat consumption through attitude. Subjective norm exerted a significant indirect effect on meat consumption through attitude and intention. Subjective norm also exerted a significant indirect effect on intention through attitude. In developing and testing conceptual models which integrate the relationship among behavioral belief, attitude variable, behavioral intention and meat consumption, this study may approach a deeper understanding of the complex relationship among meat consumption behavior-related variables. Greater understanding of the complex relationship among meat consumption behavior-related variables can improve the practical or managerial diagnosis of the problem and opportunities for different marketing strategies including meat production and meat product development and marketing communication.

Keywords

References

  1. Ajzen I. 1985. From intentions to actions: A theory of planned behaviour. in Bernden M, Pligt J. 2004. Ambivalence towards meat. Appetite, 42(1):71-78 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0195-6663(03)00119-3
  2. Andreassen TW, Lindestad B. 1998. Customer loyalty and complex services. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 9(1):7-23 https://doi.org/10.1108/09564239810199923
  3. Armitage CJ, Conner M. 2000. Attitudinal ambivalence: A test of three key hypotheses. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26(11):1421-1432 https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167200263009
  4. Bargh JA, Chaiken S, Govender R, Pratto F. 1992. The generality of the automatic attitude activation effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62(6):893-912 https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.62.6.893
  5. Bassili JN. 1996. Meta-judgmental versus operative indexes of psychological attributes: The case of measures of attitude strength. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 71(4):637-653 https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.71.4.637
  6. Beardsworth AD, Keil ET. 1991. Health-related beliefs and dietary practices among vegetarians and vegans: A qualitative study. Health Education Journal, 50(1):38-42 https://doi.org/10.1177/001789699105000111
  7. Bernden M, Pligt J. 2004. Ambivalence towards meat. Appetite, 42(1):71-78 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0195-6663(03)00119-3
  8. Fishbein M, Ajzen J. 1975. Beliefs, attitude, intention, and behavior. In Bernden M, Pligt J. 2004. Ambivalence towards meat. Appetite, 42(1):71-78 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0195-6663(03)00119-3
  9. George JF. 2004. The theory of planned behavior and internet purchasing. Internet Research, 14(3):198-212 https://doi.org/10.1108/10662240410542634
  10. Gilbert GR, Goode MMH, Moutinho L. 2004. Measuring customer satisfaction in the fast food industry: a cross-national approach. Journal of Services Marketing, 18(5):371-383 https://doi.org/10.1108/08876040410548294
  11. Hansen T, Jensen JM, Solgaard HS. 2004. Predicting online grocery buying intention. International Journal of Information Management, 24(6):539-550 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2004.08.004
  12. Jonas K, Diehl M, Brömer P. 1997. Effects of attitudinal ambivalence on information processing and attitude-intention consistency. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 33(2):190-210 https://doi.org/10.1006/jesp.1996.1317
  13. Kang JH, Jeong HJ. 2007. A study on the causal relationships among consumer's affective belief, environmental belief, subjective norm, attitude and meat consumption behavior. Korean J. Food Culture, 22(5):582-589
  14. Kenyon PM, Barker ME. 1998. Attitudes towards meat-eating in vegetarian and non-vegetarian teenage girls in England: An ethnographic approach. Appetite, 30(2):185-198 https://doi.org/10.1006/appe.1997.0129
  15. Lam T, Hsu CHC. 2006. Predicting behavioral intention of choosing a travel destination. Tourism Management, 27(4):589-599 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2005.02.003
  16. Lea E, Worsley A. 2001. Influences on meat consumption in Australia. Appetite, 36(2):127-36 https://doi.org/10.1006/appe.2000.0386
  17. Lea E, Worsley A. 2002. The cognitive contexts of beliefs about the healthiness of meat. Public Health Nurtition, 5(1):37-45
  18. Mahon D, Cowan C, McCarthy M. 2006. The role of attitudes, subjective norm, perceived control and habit in the consumption of ready meals and takeaways in Great Britain. Food Quality and Preference, 17(6):474-481 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2005.06.001
  19. Nunnually JC. 1967. Psychometric theory. McGraw-Hill, New York. In Andreassen TW, Lindestad B. 1998. Customer loyalty and complex services. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 9(1):7-23 https://doi.org/10.1108/09564239810199923
  20. Olsen SO. 2003. Understanding the relationship between age and seafood consumption. Food Quality and Preference, 14(3):199-209 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0950-3293(02)00055-1
  21. Olsen SO, Wilcox J, Olsson U. 2005. Consequences of ambivalence on satisfaction and loyalty. Psychology & Marketing, 22(3):247-269 https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.20057
  22. Povey R, Wellens B, Conner M. 2001. Attitudes towards following meat, vegetarian and vegan diets: An examination of the role of ambivalence. Appetite, 37(1):15-26 https://doi.org/10.1006/appe.2001.0406
  23. Priester JR, Petty RE. 1996. The gradual threshold model of ambivalence: Relating the positive and negative bases of attitudes to subjective ambivalence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71(3):431-449 https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.71.3.431
  24. Richardson NJ, Shepherd R, Elliman NA. 1993. Current attitudes and future influences on meat consumption in the UK. Appetite, 21(1):41-51 https://doi.org/10.1006/appe.1993.1035
  25. Santos MLS, Booth DA. 1996. Influences on meat avoidance among British students. Appetite, 27(3):197-205 https://doi.org/10.1006/appe.1996.0046
  26. Sapp SG. 1991. Impact of nutritional knowledge within an expanded rational expectations model of beef consumption. J Nutr. Educ., 23(5):214-222 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3182(12)81250-7
  27. Sparks P, Conner M, James R, Sheperd R, Povey R. 2001. Ambivalence about health-related behaviours: An exploration in the domain of food choice. British Journal of Health Psychology, 6(1):53-68 https://doi.org/10.1348/135910701169052
  28. Sutherland HJS, Da Cunha R, Lockwood GA, Till JE. 1998. What attitudes and beliefs underlie patients' decisions about participating in chemotherapy trials. Medical Decision Making, 18(1):61-69 https://doi.org/10.1177/0272989X9801800113
  29. Worsley A, Skrzypiec G. 1998. Do attitudes predict red meat consumption among young people. Ecol. Food Nutr., 37(2):163-195 https://doi.org/10.1080/03670244.1998.9991543