Abstract
Objective
Characterize the process of family vegetable selection (especially cruciferous, deep
orange, and dark green leafy vegetables); demonstrate the usefulness of Exchange Theory
(how family norms and experiences interact with rewards and costs) for interpreting
the data.
Design
Eight focus groups, 2 with each segment (men/women vegetable likers/dislikers based
on a screening form). Participants completed a vegetable intake form.
Setting
Rural Appalachian Pennsylvania.
Participants
Sixty-one low-income, married/cohabiting men (n = 28) and women (n = 33).
Analysis
Thematic analysis within Exchange Theory framework for qualitative data. Descriptive
analysis, t tests and chi-square tests for quantitative data.
Results
Exchange Theory proved useful for understanding that regardless of sex or vegetable
liker/disliker status, meal preparers see more costs than rewards to serving vegetables.
Experience plus expectations of food preparer role and of deference to family member
preferences supported a family norm of serving only vegetables acceptable to everyone.
Emphasized vegetables are largely ignored because of unfamiliarity; family norms prevented
experimentation and learning through exposure.
Conclusions and Implications
Interventions to increase vegetable consumption of this audience could (1) alter family
norms about vegetables served, (2) change perceptions of experiences, (3) reduce social
and personal costs of serving vegetables, and (4) increase tangible and social rewards
of serving vegetables.
Key Words
To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
Purchase one-time access:
Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online accessSNEB Member Login
SNEB Members, full access to the journal is a member benefit. Login via the SNEB Website to access all journal content and features.Subscribe:
Subscribe to Journal of Nutrition Education and BehaviorAlready a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
References
- An analysis of disparities in health status and access to care in the Appalachian region.Appalachian Regional Commission, Washington, DC2004 (Published November 2004. Accessed November 19, 2009)
Flasher WC. Cultural diversity: eating in America, Appalachian. Ohio State University Extension Fact Sheet, HYG-5252-95-R10. http://ohioline.osu.edu/hyg-fact/5000/pdf/5252.pdf. Accessed February 23, 2010.
US Department of Agriculture. MyPyramid Web site. http://www.MyPyramid.gov. Accessed November 20, 2009.
- Most Americans eat much less than the recommended amounts of fruits and vegetables.J Am Diet Assoc. 2006; 106: 1371-1379
- Have Americans increased their fruit and vegetable intake? The trends between 1988 and 2002.Am J Prev Med. 2007; 32: 257-263
- 5 a day fruit and vegetable intervention improves consumption in a low income population.J Am Diet Assoc. 2001; 101: 195-202
- Final results of the Maryland WIC Food For Life program.Prev Med. 2003; 37: 406-416
- Sisters in Health: experiential program emphasizing social interaction increases fruit and vegetable intake among low-income adults.J Nutr Educ Behav. 2005; 37: 265-270
- Changes in vegetable and fruit consumption and awareness among US adults: results of the 1991 and 1997 5 A Day for Better Health Program surveys.J Am Diet Assoc. 2002; 102: 809-817
- Overview of the health benefits of fruit and vegetable consumption for the dietetics professional: selected literature.J Am Diet Assoc. 2000; 100: 1511-1521
- More Americans are eating “5 a day” but intakes of dark green and cruciferous vegetables remain low.J Nutr. 2000; 130: 3063-3067
- Psychosocial factors and dietary habits associated with vegetable consumption.Nutrition. 2000; 18: 247-254
- Servers and providers: the distribution of food within the family.Soc Rev. 1986; 34: 115-157
- Couples' gender role preferences and management of family food preferences.J Nutr Educ Behav. 2002; 34: 215-223
- Families' accounts of the causal processes in food choice.Appetite. 1999; 33: 89-108
Kluhsman BC, Bencivenga M, Ward AJ, Lehman E, Lengerich EJ, Initiatives of eleven rural Appalachian cancer coalitions in Pennsylvania and New York. Prev Chronic Dis. 2006;36:A122. http://www.cdc.gov/pcd/issues/2006/oct/06_0045.htm. Accessed November 20, 2009.
- Exchange and resource theories.in: Boss P.G. Doherty W.J. LaRossa R. Schumm W.R. Steinmetz S.K. Sourcebook of Family Theories and Methods: A Contextual Approach. Plenum Press, New York, NY1993: 385-411
- Understanding the food choices of low-income families: Summary of findings.USDA Food and Consumer Service, Alexandria, VA1997
- Factors influencing the proportion of food consumed by nursing home residents with dementia.J Am Geriatr Soc. 1999; 47: 879-885
- Using social marketing to plan a nutrition education program targeting teens.J Ext. 2003; 41 (http://www.joe.org/joe/2003december/a4.php. Accessed November 20, 2009.): 6FEA4
Johnson DB, Pickering S, Birkett D. Healthy Habits: Washington WIC Program. http://www.nal.usda.gov/wicworks/Sharing_Center/spg/WA_report.pdf. Published June 2006. Accessed November 20, 1999.
- Improving results for nutrition: a commentary on an agenda and the need for implementation research.J Nutr. 2008; 138: 646-650
- Factors affecting vegetable consumption in low-income households.J Am Diet Assoc. 1994; 94: 1309-1311
- Attitudes and behaviors related to fruits and vegetables among low-income women in the WIC program.J Nutr Educ. 1996; 28: 149-156
- Fruit and vegetable assessment: performance of 2 new short instruments and a food frequency questionnaire.J Am Diet Assoc. 2002; 102: 1764-1772
- Associations of decisional balance, processes of change, and self-efficacy with stages of change for increased fruit and vegetable intake among low-income, African-American mothers.J Am Diet Assoc. 2006; 106: 841-849
- Assessing educational materials using cognitive interviews can improve and support lesson design.J Ext. 2007; 45 (3TOT4. http://www.joe.org/joe/2007june/tt4.php. Accessed November 20, 2009.)
- Focus Groups: A Practical Guide for Applied Research.2nd ed. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA1994
- Content Analysis for the Social Sciences and Humanities.Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA1969
- Eat your greens: the Scottish consumer's perspective on fruit and vegetables.Health Educ J. 1995; 54: 186-197
- Bitter taste markers explain variability in vegetable sweetness, bitterness, and intake.Physiol Behav. 2006; 87: 304-313
- Women, Food and Families.Manchester University Press, Manchester, United Kingdom1988
Prevention Institute. Nutrition policy profiles: supermarket access in low-income communities. http://www.preventioninstitute.org/CHI_supermarkets.html. Published May 2002. Accessed November 20, 2009.
- Food spending behaviors and perceptions are associated with fruit and vegetable intake among parents and their preadolescent children.J Nutr Educ Behav. 2007; 39: 26-30
- Measuring attitudes, self-efficacy, and social and environmental influences on fruit and vegetable consumption of 11- and 12-year-old children: reliability and validity.J Am Diet Assoc. 2005; 105: 257-261
- Appalachian Home Cooking: History, Culture, and Recipes.University Press of Kentucky, Lexington, KY2005
- An evaluation of the Connecticut Farmers' Market Coupon Program.J Nutr Educ. 1992; 24: 185-191
- Effectiveness of community-based interventions to increase fruit and vegetable consumption.J Nutr Educ. 2000; 32: 341-352
Article info
Publication history
Published online: May 10, 2010
Identification
Copyright
© 2010 Society for Nutrition Education. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
