International Journal of Hospitality Management 35 (2013) 203213

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

International Journal of Hospitality Management

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijhosman

The roles of attitude, subjective norm, and perceived behavioral

control in the formation of consumers behavioral intentions to read
menu labels in the restaurant industry
Eojina Kim a,1 , Sunny Ham b, , Il Sun Yang c,2 , Jeong Gil Choi d
a

Department of Apparel, Events & Hospitality Management, Iowa State University, Ames, IA 50011, USA
Department of Tourism Management, Gachon University, Soojung-gu, Seongnam-si 461-701, Republic of Korea
c
Department of Food & Nutrition, Yonsei University, Seoul, Republic of Korea
d
Kyunghee University, Seoul, Republic of Korea
b

a r t i c l e

i n f o

Keywords:
Nutritional labeling
Nutritional information
Theory of planned behavior
Consumers behavior
Food-away-from-home

a b s t r a c t
Increases in food-away-from-home purchases brought public awareness to policies for improving nutritional value of foods served at restaurants. As a result, offering choices to consumers that affect health
and wellness has become a growing concern in the food industry and restaurants, as evidenced by provisions for nutritional labeling to guide consumers food purchasing decisions for healthy eating. This
study pursues an empirical examination of the consumers behavior toward reading nutritional labeling at casual-dining restaurants. The study tests the conceptual framework of the proposed effects of
constructs on consumers behavioral intentions. Findings indicate that the variable of attitude acts as a
mediator in the relationship between subjective norm and behavioral intention. This study is meaningful
to academia by offering insights into the relationship between consumers behavior and nutritional information in the context of restaurants and is benecial to the restaurant industry by offering implications
for establishing marketing strategies to improve consumers perceptions of menu items.
2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Healthy eating has been a key concern among consumers who
are conscious in their physical well-being and reects a basic desire
of human behavior. The increase in health-conscious consumers
has changed the amount and quality of information desired from
restaurants menus (Cranage et al., 2005; Thomas and Mills, 2006).
The increase in consumption of food-away-from-home may have a
profound impact on consumers health. While not ignoring physical inactivity, overconsumption of calories and poor nutrition stem
from a fundamental rise in consumption of food-away-from-home,
especially at fast-food restaurants, and parallel the prevalence of
overweight and obesity (Ogden et al., 2010; USDA, 2011). Food consumed at restaurants, in comparison to foods prepared at home, has
more calories, total fat, saturated fat, and cholesterol or less dietary
ber, calcium, and iron, per calorie (Guthrie et al., 2002) and represents larger portions (Ello-Martin et al., 2005; Rolls et al., 2002;

Corresponding author. Tel.: +82 31 750 8669.

E-mail addresses: eojina@iastate.edu (E. Kim), ham.sunny@yahoo.com (S. Ham),
isyang@yonsei.ac.kr (I.S. Yang), jechoi@khu.ac.kr (J.G. Choi).
1
Tel: +82 2 380 8393.
2
Tel: +82 2 2123 3121.
0278-4319/$ see front matter 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2013.06.008

Young and Nestle, 2007), all of which promote overconsumption.

Moreover, consumers who frequently eat out are more likely to
have excess energy (Orfanos et al., 2007) and fat intake (French
et al., 2000; Paeratakul et al., 2003; Satia et al., 2004). Concurrently,
consumers are generally unaware of misestimates of the number of
calories of restaurants foods (Burton et al., 2006). With a potential
relationship between a rise in consumption of food-away-fromhome and obesity (e.g., Burns et al., 2002; Currie et al., 2010; Chou
et al., 2008; Drichoutis et al., 2012; Duffey et al., 2007; Dunn, 2010;
French et al., 2000; Thompson et al., 2003), indications for a rise in
public awareness are driving implementation of policies to improve
the quality of nutrition in the food served at restaurants. One of the
major interventions for establishing better patterns for consuming healthy food is providing nutritional labeling for meals served
at restaurants. Requests for nutritional labeling are manifestations
of the principle that consumers have the right to know the foods
nutritional values, which enables choosing suitably for their needs
(Pomeranz and Brownell, 2008). Consequently, provision for nutritional labeling has gained acceptance as an important aspect of
consumers decisions for nutritional purchases for healthy eating
(Drichoutis et al., 2006). However, there are some studies which
resulted in conicting or mixed outcomes in regards to the impact
of nutrition labels, as some studies may show marginal or uncertain effects when the nutrition labeling provided in some cases

204

E. Kim et al. / International Journal of Hospitality Management 35 (2013) 203213

according to the type of restaurants and customers (Elbel et al.,

2009, 2011; Kral et al., 2002; Sproul et al., 2003; Stubenitsky et al.,
2000).
Without doubt, the interest in the trend toward mandatory
nutritional labeling for restaurants is understandably gaining
global visibility and has attracted the attention of many governments, policy agencies, and public health advocates in the U.S.
(e.g., The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010), the
EU (e.g., Commission Directive 2003/120/EC), Korea (e.g., Special
Act on Childrens Food Safety and Nutrition), etc. Mandatory nutritional labeling has become a new tool to assist consumers informed
choices.
The provision of nutritional labeling on restaurant menus has
the potential to impact, positively, consumers health by reducing
consumption of less healthy food (Burton et al., 2006). For example,
studies show that nutritional labeling on menus induces consumers
to choose lower calorie offerings (e.g., Burton et al., 2006; Conklin
et al., 2005). Since offering valuable information to consumers is
benecial, identifying and understanding the impact of consumers
underlying beliefs and the factors inuencing consumers behavior
toward nutrition labeling are important.
Despite menu labels provided in restaurants, the effort is useless, if customers do not read. In this study, intention to read menu
labels is a dependent variable because, reasonably, a person only
acts upon personal intent. A meta-analysis of 87 studies employing
theory of planned behavior as the research framework, supporting
the close relationship between intention and behavior showed an
average correlation of 0.53 between intention and actual behavior (Sheppard, Hartwick, & Warshaw, 1988). The behavioral model
proposed by the current study may lead policy-makers, practitioners, and researchers to develop strategies for marketing health
and nutrition. The current research focuses on consumers behavior toward nutritional labeling at the point of decision-making as
well and on the effects of inuential variables on behavioral intensions in the context of restaurants. The study intends to identify
factors that cause customers to read menu labels, and aims to offer
suggestions for governmental policy-makers or restaurateurs to
offer inducements for customers who do not read menu labels
to change to read menu labels. The study employs the theory of
planned behavior model. More specically, the objectives of this
study are: (1) to identify the underlying attitude, subjective norm,
and perceived behavioral control toward nutritional labeling at the
point-of-purchase in the context of restaurants, and (2) to investigate the effects of the aggregation of predictive constructs, such
as attitude, subjective norm, and perceived behavioral control, on
consumers intentions to read nutritional labeling in restaurants.
2. Theoretical background
2.1. Trends in nutritional labeling for consumers
The Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010,
enacted by the U.S. Congress amended the Patient Protection and
Affordable Care Act (PPACA), in Section 4205, to require restaurants
with 20 or more locations to provide calorie content information
total calories, fat, saturated fat, cholesterol, sodium, total carbohydrates, sugars, ber and total protein for standard menu
items. Similarly the policies of the U.S., European Union, United
Kingdom, Korea and other countries established mandatory or voluntary policies, requiring restaurants to provide consumers with a
list of nutrients in menus items.
2.1.1. Benets of using nutritional labeling
Apparent benets from mandatory labeling policies for restaurants menus are changes in consumers behavior subsequent

to providing information of nutrients needed for human health

(Variyam, 2005). Consumers use the nutritional labeling for
informed choices when selecting healthy diets (Burton and Creyer,
2004; Burton et al., 2006; Boger, 1995; Conklin et al., 2005; Hwang
and Lorenzen, 2008; Kozup et al., 2003; Kral et al., 2002; Sproul
et al., 2003; Stubenitsky et al., 2000), leading to healthier outcomes (Crutcheld et al., 2001), including reduction in morbidity
and mortality associated with poor diets (Bush and Williams, 1999).
Additionally, positive attributes and evaluations usually ensue
when consumers associate positive experiences with labels, leading to improved sales and behavioral intentions resulting from
consumers satisfaction (Wansink et al., 2001).
Furthermore, nutritional labeling may benet all consumers, not
just those who read the labeling; providing healthy menus results
in menu reformulation. In fact, regulations and recommendations
lead to signicant benets to consumers by offering healthier products as a result of menu reformulation (Beales, 1980). Consequently,
providing nutrition labeling may add value to the experiences
of restaurants consumers (Cranage et al., 2005; Mackison et al.,
2009). The provision of nutritional labeling is also benecial to
restaurateurs. Providing nutritional labeling improves images of
restaurants as sources of valuable information (Glanz et al., 1992)
and enhances consumers condence in food-service establishments (Glanz et al., 1992; Thomas and Mills, 2006). Wansink et al.
(2001) demonstrated that restaurateurs, by providing nutritional
information through labels, enhanced perceptions of menus attractiveness, which may also favorably inuence actual consumption.
Indeed, inaccessibility to any nutritional labeling for consumers
could result in difculty evaluating the healthiness of some choices
on restaurants menus (Kozup et al., 2003). Similarly, Roe et al.
(1999) emphasized consumers considerations of products benets
for health benet, when labels reect information for healthiness
and nutritional values. Given the opportunity, consumers decisions
would be more informed if nutritional labeling were mandatory
(Variyam, 2005). A number of studies postulated that customers,
informed of the nutritional content of menu items, would select
according to the advice from menu labels, and choose lower\calorie
offerings (Albright et al., 1990; Burton and Creyer, 2004; Burton
et al., 2006; Boger, 1995; Conklin et al., 2005; Hwang and Lorenzen,
2008; Kozup et al., 2003; Kral et al., 2002; Milich et al., 1976;
Stubenitsky et al., 2000; Sproul et al., 2003).
2.1.2. Relationship of nutrition labeling to purchasing behavior
Important issues related to use of nutritional labeling affect
consumers purchasing behaviors. Nutritional labeling inuences
food-purchasing habits by decreasing the purchase of lesshealthful items (Roe et al., 1999; Burton et al., 2006), because, in
general, consumers want to avoid the negative aspects of food
(Drichoutis et al., 2006). Consequently, their intentions are to
choose healthy foods based upon available nutritional information (Cranage et al., 2005). Yamamoto et al. (2005) found that
consumers behavior changed after encountering nutritional information on restaurants menus. Moreover, recent empirical research
suggested that utilizing nutritional labeling can signicantly
change dietary habits toward opting for items with higher-quality
nutrition in restaurants (Burton et al., 2006; Drichoutis et al., 2006),
or toward choosing items with fewer calories, as compared to those
patrons who did not use such information (Bassett et al., 2008).
Perhaps, the most signicant benet from nutrition labeling in
restaurants may accrue when consumers change their habits which
direct choices, resulting in healthier outcomes, such as reductions in morbidity and mortality related to poor diet and obesity
(Variyam, 2005).
However, there are some studies which resulted in conicting
or mixed outcomes in regards to the impact of nutrition labels, as
some studies may show marginal or uncertain effects when the

E. Kim et al. / International Journal of Hospitality Management 35 (2013) 203213

nutrition labeling provided in some cases according to the type of

restaurants and customers (Elbel et al., 2009, 2011; Kral et al., 2002;
Sproul et al., 2003; Stubenitsky et al., 2000). Sproul et al. (2003)
reported the case of Army cafeteria that nutrition information was
not inuential to menu selection whereas sensory attributes (i.e.,
taste, quality, and appearance) appear to be more inuential. The
effects of menu labels may differ in the types of restaurants. While
fast food restaurant (Bagozzi et al., 2000; Bassett et al., 2008), dinner
house restaurant (Burton, 2006), college cafeteria (Conklin et al.,
2005), or full-service restaurant (Pulos and Leng, 2010) showed
positive effects of nutrition labeling on menu selection, such restaurants as army cafeteria (Sproul et al., 2003), silver service (training)
restaurant (Stubenitsky et al., 2000), chain restaurant (Finkelstein
et al., 2011) or fast food restaurant visited by child and adolescent (Elbel et al., 2011) did not show statistical differences in the
menu selection. While there can be some differences in the effects
of menu labeling by the types of restaurants, the results were not
consistent. Hence, further investigation is needed on the effects of
menu labeling according to the types of restaurants. Low income
consumers may be least likely to consider nutrient value level a
crucial attribute when selecting menu at restaurants (Elbel et al.,
2009, 2011). For example, low income customers are not affected
by nutrition labeling when making a food choice (Elbel et al., 2009,
2011), and may depend the menu selection more on satiation or
dollar value of nutrients of the menu items.
2.2. Theory of planned behavior model
2.2.1. Theory of planned behavior
The theory of planned behavior (TPB), originally proposed in
1985 by Icek Ajzen, is an extension of the theory of reasoned
action (TRA) (Ajzen and Fishbein, 1980; Fishbein and Ajzen, 1975).
TPB is a theoretically structured framework that predicts and
explains human behavior according to beliefs and attitudes (Ajzen,
1991). TPB postulates that the proximal determinant of behavior is a personal intention to perform the behavior, when three
conceptually independent constructs determine intention: attitude, subjective norm, and perceived behavioral control. Specic
salient beliefs which underlie behavioral, normative, and control beliefs determine all of the constructs (attitude, subjective
norm, and perceived behavioral control). Furthermore, TPB is one
of the major expectancy-value models employed by research to
investigate behavior-related food choices and behavioral intention. Numerous studies relied on the TPB to provide the theoretical
background, such as healthy eating (Conner et al., 2002; Payne
et al., 2005), dietary behavior (Baker et al., 2003), food choice
(Sparks et al., 1992), customers complaints of restaurants (Cheng
et al., 2005), and choices for food-away-from home (Bhuyan, 2010).
Accordingly, this study applies the TPB to understand consumers
behavioral intentions toward nutrition labeling. Hence, this TPB
model guides the conceptual model of this study in the context
of restaurants. Within this context, this study expects that an individual consumers attitude toward nutritional labeling, subjective
norm, and perceived behavioral control inuence intention to read
menu labels.
2.2.2. Attitude toward behavior and behavioral beliefs
The rst important determinant for behavioral intention is attitude which refers to the degree to which a person has a favorable
or unfavorable evaluation or appraisal of the behavior in question (Ajzen, 1991, p. 188). In other words, a persons mental state
reects that individuals overall positive or negative evaluation of
performing a particular behavior. Attitude arises from a set of more
specic, salient, behavioral beliefs that reect perceived outcomes
associated with the targeted behavior. Behavioral beliefs indicate
individuals understanding of the consequences from a particular

205

behavior. The concept, based on the subjective probability, suggests

that the behavior will produce a given outcome (Ajzen, 1991). Ajzen
(1991) explicated that a favorable or unfavorable attitude is directly
proportional to the strength of the behavioral mindset regarding
a likely outcome of action derived from an expectancy-value
model. Several empirical studies attempted to provide evidence
that attitudes play a role in affecting behavioral intentions to read
nutritional labeling (Kozup et al., 2003). In consumer research,
studies showed that the provision of nutrition labeling has an effect
on attitudes toward products and purchase intensions (Burton and
Creyer, 2004; Burton et al., 2006; Kozup et al., 2003). Kozup et al.
(2003) identied the provision of nutritional labeling related to a
targeted item had a signicant impact on attitude toward nutrition.
Burton et al. (2006) highlighted providing nutritional labeling as
having a signicant main effect on attitudes toward food on menus
of restaurants. Expectancy disconrmation theory suggests that the
discrepancy between expected and objective levels of nutrients
should result in an interaction between the provision of nutritional information and the healthiness of the menu item. The study
showed that consumers substantially underestimated calorie levels for less-healthful entrees and preference for less-healthful items
diminished with the disclosure of nutritional information. Provision of nutritional information among chain restaurants standard
menus items is, therefore, apparently helpful. Kozup et al. (2003)
found that disclosure of healthful nutritional labeling, with a hearthealthy claim, improved consumers evaluations (attitude toward
nutrition, overall food attitude, and purchase intention) toward
packaging or restaurants menus. Therefore, attitude represents a
core elicitor of behavioral intention to use nutrition labeling. As
discussed earlier, a persons salient beliefs about certain behavior
determine the attitude toward the behavior. Similarly, behavioral
beliefs toward reading nutritional labeling inuence consumers
attitudes and ultimately their behavior. This study, therefore, posits
that consumers behavioral beliefs regarding reading of nutritional
labels affects attitudes, and a relationship exists between attitudes
and the behavioral intention to read nutritional labeling in the context of restaurants.
2.2.3. Subjective norm and normative beliefs
This study postulates that subjective norm is a second determinant for behavioral intention. Ajzen (1991) dened subjective
norm as the perceived social pressure to perform or not to perform the behavior (p. 188). In other words, a subjective norm is
the recognizable opinions of others who are close to and important
to an individual and who maintain inuence over decision-making,
which affects an individuals behavior to perform or not to perform
an action. The beliefs that underlie subjective norm are normative beliefs. Subjective norm is a function of a persons normative
beliefs of salient referents that inuence action or inaction and
motivates compliance with these referents. Thus, normative beliefs
are social pressures from important referent individuals or groups
who approve or disapprove a persons behavior or action, and the
motivations to comply with these pressures (Ajzen and Fishbein,
1980; Ajzen, 1991). Otherwise, a normative belief is a persons concept of a behavior based on personal experience, or to an extent,
second-hand information from acquaintances and friends past
experiences. The role of a subjective norm has had discussion in
the domain of behavior reected in choices for food (Armitage and
Conner, 2001; Dennison and Shepherd, 1995; Sparks et al., 2001;
Tarkiainen and Sundqvist, 2005; Wong and Mullan, 2009). Research
indicated subjective norms to be the best predictor for intentions
to eat fruit (Pawlak and Malinauskas, 2008) and for intentions
governing purchases of food (Dean et al., 2008). Bagozzi et al.
(2000) stated that subjective norm inuences consumption at fastfood restaurants. Previous studies concentrated on one dimension
of behavior for choosing food, and limited attempts investigated

206

E. Kim et al. / International Journal of Hospitality Management 35 (2013) 203213

intentions to read nutritional labeling in the context of restaurants.

In the domain of nutritional labeling, limited evidence suggests that
referent groups inuence the decision to read nutritional labeling.
Ajzen (1991), however, asserted that subjective norm is one of the
dominant predictors explaining behavioral intention, and normative beliefs underlie subjective norm. Accordingly, this research uses
a subjective norm as a key construct of an interest in proposing an
association between normative beliefs and subjective norm, characterized by subjective norms inuencing a consumers intention
to read nutritional labeling in a restaurant setting.
2.2.4. Perceived behavioral control and control beliefs
The third determinant for behavioral intention is perceived
behavioral control, described as the perceived ease or difculty
of performing the behavior (Ajzen, 1991, p188). That is, the TPB
focuses on perceived behavioral control, since identifying and measuring the actual resources and opportunities encountered when
performing a particular behavior is difcult. The generally accepted
notion is that the total set of attainable control beliefs determines
perceived behavioral control. These beliefs refer to a persons perception of the existence of resources and opportunities required to
perform a specic behavior, and evaluation of the level of importance of such resources and opportunities for the accomplishment
of outcomes (Ajzen, 1998). Control factors have further categorization into internal and external constraining factors: Internal control
relates to knowledge/self-efcacy (e.g., skills, abilities, power of
will, and compulsion), and external control relates to the environment (e.g., time, opportunity, and dependence on others) (Ajzen,
1991). In the domain of healthy behavior related to food, many
researchers examined the relationship between perceived behavioral control and intention to perform a behavior (Armitage and
Conner, 2001; Dean et al., 2008; Dennison and Shepherd, 1995;
Pawlak and Malinauskas, 2008; Pawlak et al., 2009; Povey et al.,
2000; Sparks et al., 2001; Tarkiainen and Sundqvist, 2005; Wong
and Mullan, 2009). Nayga (1999) said self-efcacy regarding change
to dietary habits was a positive factor that affected consumers use
of labels. The restaurant sector has used perceived behavioral control to predict customers expressions of dissatisfaction, showing
a positive effect on behavioral intention (Cheng et al., 2005). Even
though previous studies found that perceived behavioral control
affects the formation of behavioral intention, limited investigation
considered an association between perceived behavioral control
and use of nutritional labeling. Nevertheless, perceived behavioral control plays a signicant role in the formation of behavior,
thereby justifying application of nutritional labeling utilization in
restaurants. Therefore, this study proposes a relationship between
perceived behavioral control and customers intentions to read
nutritional labeling in a restaurant.
2.2.5. Behavioral intention
Intention, dened as a plan to perform a particular behavior, is
an accepted, perhaps the most important factor, for directly predicting behavior (Ajzen, 1991). In marketing, behavioral intention,
in general, is specically a substitute indicator for actual behavior (Fishbein and Ajzen, 1975). Consumers tend to perform actual
behaviors when their intentions to perform that behavior become
stronger (Ajzen and Fishbein, 2000). However, the relationship
between behavior and behavioral intention is difcult to measure
in reality. The assumption is that formation of behavioral intention
is an immediate antecedent of behavior and represents three types
of cognitions: attitude, subjective norm, and perceived behavioral
control, where the weight of each predictor is in accordance with its
importance perceived by an individual toward the behavior (Ajzen,
2002).
Generally, the stronger the intention to undertake the behavior,
the more likely its performance becomes actuality (Ajzen, 1991).

Thus, Ajzen and Fishbein (2000) recommended that measurement

of behavioral intention assumes predictive power for the future,
with the focus on behavioral intention rather than actual behavior.
Therefore, this study uses behavioral intention as a construct for
outcome, inuenced by attitude, subjective norm, and perceived
behavioral control.
2.3. Hypotheses
Based on the theoretical framework developed earlier, proposed
hypotheses consider the context of restaurants:
Hypothesis 1: Consumers behavioral beliefs inuence attitude
positively toward the reading of menu labels.
Hypothesis 2: Normative beliefs inuence subjective norm positively toward the reading of menu labels.
Hypothesis 3: Control beliefs inuence perceived behavioral control positively toward the reading of menu labels.
Hypothesis 4: Attitude toward behavior has a positive effect on
behavioral intention to read menu labels.
Hypothesis 5: Subjective norm has a positive effect on behavioral
intention to read menu labels.
Hypothesis 6: Perceived behavioral control has a positive effect
on behavioral intention to read menu labels.
With these hypotheses, this study proposes a TPB model for
restaurants as shown in Fig. 1. The model displays behavioral intentions relationships to the predictors (attitude, subjective norm,
and perceived behavioral control), and the association of these
antecedent variables with constructs of beliefs (behavioral, normative, and control beliefs). This research treats constructs of
beliefs as exogenous variables; whereas, predictors and behavioral
intention are endogenous variables.
3. Methodology
3.1. Elicitation study
For the development of variables for the study, procedures
in formative research and questionnaire development were constructed in accordance with an established guideline by Ajzen
(2002). Identifying accessible behavioral, normative, and control
beliefs, formative research and validation of the theorys constructs
of beliefs required new sets of beliefs and salient referents for
each new context and from each population. To elicit belief-based
measurements, the research employed focus groups consisting
of one researcher, one faculty member, three graduate students
in food service management, and four customers from restaurants. Four faculty members and four customers from casual-dining
restaurants reviewed the draft of the questionnaire. The process
maintained strict compatibility of all measures with the behavior,
and reviewers comments led to slight revisions to correct ambiguous wording. As a next step, a pilot test, to ensure reliability of the
scales, included 32 undergraduate and graduate students at universities in Seoul, Korea. The results of the pilot test revealed that
the questionnaire had adequate reliability and clarity.
3.2. Measurement
All predicted variables of the constructs in the TPB have direct
assessment through respondents evaluating each set of scales.
To determine consumers behavior toward nutritional labeling in
restaurants, based on the TPB, this study measured six exogenous variables and one endogenous variable. Measurement of all
responses required use of data from seven-point bipolar adjectival scales, from 3 to +3 (e.g., harmfulbenecial; extremely
unlikelyextremely likely). Semantic differentials have determined

E. Kim et al. / International Journal of Hospitality Management 35 (2013) 203213

207

Fig. 1. Proposed model.

seven-points to be optimal. Later, scoring was shifted from bipolar

to unipolar conguration (i.e., addition by 4).
3.2.1. Belief-based measures and evaluative component
To induce behavioral outcomes, participants in the pilot study
responded to the questions (e.g., What do you believe are the
advantages of your reading menu labels in restaurants? Formulation of six behavioral outcomes were the results from the pilot
study: (a) healthier choices for food, (b) control weight, (c) maintain good eating habits, (d) prevention of obesity, (e) sense of
self-satisfaction, and (f) increase nutritional knowledge. To measure outcome evaluations, respondents indicated, on seven-point
scales, personal beliefs for the importance of these six behavioral
outcomes. For the formulation of normative referents, three questions in the pilot study attempted to have participants identity
relevant referent individuals and groups, readily accessible from
memory (e.g., Are there any individuals or groups who would
approve of your reading nutritional labeling in a restaurant before
placing an order?) The questions revealed ve referent groups:
(a) family members (parents, spouse, children, brothers or sisters),
(b) friends, (c) colleagues or neighbors, (d) the media (TV, radio,
newspapers, or magazines), and (e) experts in health and nutrition (doctors, nurses, dietitians, or teachers). The consequence was
development of ve statements of motivation to comply with each
referent: When it comes to nutrition, I want to do what my family members/friends/colleagues or neighbors/experts in health and
nutrition think that I should do. And I want to do what the media
recommends. Upon request, and to elicit responses regarding the
control factor, the group of participants for the pilot study generated a list of accessibility factors that may facilitate or impede
the performance of the behavior, for example, What factors or
circumstances would enable you to read nutritional labeling in
a restaurant before placing an order? Development of ve control factors resulted: (a) having good eating habits, (b) time and
effort, (c) ability to read nutritional labeling, (d) format of nutritional labelings panels, and (e) extensive list of nutrients. Thus,
ve powers of control factors were developed (e.g., Having good
eating habits makes it easier to read nutrition labeling in a restaurant before placing an order.) Each control beliefs had its own
equivalent statement for power of control.
The variable of beliefs plays a central role in the TPB, and
the assumption is that beliefs provide cognitive and affective
foundations for attitude, subjective norm, and perceived behavioral control. Each six-item scale, ranging from strongly disagree
(1) to strongly agree (7) measured behavioral beliefs (e.g., My
reading nutritional information at a restaurant before placing my
order allows me to make healthier food choices.), and extremely

not important (1) to extremely important (7) measured evaluations of outcomes (e.g., For me to make healthier food choice is
1 = extremely not important, 7 = extremely important). Five normative statements of beliefs (e.g., My family members think I should
read nutritional labeling at a restaurant before placing my order.)
ranged from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (7), and motivation to comply with each referent (e.g., When it comes to nutrition,
I want to do what my family members think I should do.) ranged
from 1 = not at all to 7 = very much. Finally, ve items examined
control beliefs (e.g., I have good eating habits. 1 = strongly disagree; 7 = strongly agree), and each items power of control factors
(e.g., Having good eating habits makes it easier to read nutritional
labeling at a restaurant before placing an order. 1 = extremely false;
7 = extremely true).
All items for each belief with corresponding evaluative component multiplicatively combined, using the expectancy-value
approach proposed
an overall level for
 by Ajzen
 (1991), obtained

NBj MCj ,
CBk CFk ).
each construct ( BBi OEi ,
3.2.2. Direct construct measures
Six statements, using adjectival pairs, measured attitude toward
the behavior (e.g., For me, reading nutritional labeling would be:
1 = Bad; 7 = Good). Five statements anchored by extremely disagree
(1) to extremely agree (7) (e.g., Most people who are important to
me think that I should read nutritional labeling) measured subjective norm. Measurement of perceived behavioral control used ve
items (e.g., I am condent that I can use nutrition labeling), and
four items measured behavioral intentions, with responses ranging
from extremely unlikely (1) to extremely likely (7) (e.g., I am willing
to read nutritional labeling).

3.3. The sample and data collection

A quota sampling method, based on casual-dining restaurants
census gures of the Korean population was the basis for selecting
participants for the study. The quota sampling procedure applied
age and gender as the main control characteristics. Previous studies
support the method in food service research to select a representative population (e.g., Lion & Kommer, 2008; Verbeke and Vackier,
2005). The next step was to recruit the sample specied by the
census. Approaching a variety of customers of various ages and
both genders, used a technique from prior social science research
that recruits volunteers from companies, universities, and community clubs (e.g., Guo et al., 2009; McKay-Nesbitt et al., 2011).
Recruitment of participants continued until reaching data saturation according to both data collection and analysis. Potential

208

E. Kim et al. / International Journal of Hospitality Management 35 (2013) 203213

participants received a cover letter explaining the study and the

procedures, followed by information regarding nutritional labeling.
The data collection used Dillmans mixed-mode survey
(Dillman, 2006), which is a method combining various techniques.
Participants received email invitations containing a link to the surveys website. Offering a premium of a ve-dollar coffee coupon
promoted participation in the survey. For convenience, participants
could submit completed questionnaires through the website, by
email, postal service, or telefax. In order to satisfy the objectives
of this study, a screening question, regarding experience using
casual dining chain restaurants within 6 months, ltered appropriate respondents. Returned responses totaled 629, of which, 12
were incomplete or outliers. After eliminating those, 617 usable
responses remained for data analysis. The demographics of the
respondents included a mean age of 32, more females (61.2%), while
53.2% respondents had one or two experiences dining in casual
restaurants within a month.
3.4. Data analysis
This study used SPSS 16.0 for Windows and AMOS 7.0 for data
analysis. The two-step approach recommended by Anderson and
Gerbing (1988), Burt (1976), and Kline (1998), presents unique
advantages for separating the two phases into a measurement
model and a structural model. The rst step involves a conrmatory factor analysis (CFA) with maximum likelihood for estimating
the measurement of the constructs components, which determine
the relationships of the indicators with their posited and underlying
constructs. The second part of the two-step approach, the structural
equation modeling (SEM), species the casual relationships among
the hypothesized constructs and tests the proposed model. To further investigate the mediating effect of attitude toward behavior,
this study used analysis suggested by Baron and Kenny (1986) with
the bias-corrected bootstrap-function with 1000 samples of AMOS
7.0.
4. Results
4.1. Measurement model
As mentioned, this study rst conducted the CFA to estimate
the measurement model by verifying the underlying structure of
constructs and checked undimensionality, reliabilities, and validities of the measurement model before testing the structural model.
To test internal consistency of the items for measurement, a reliability test used Cronbachs alpha, producing values for direct
measures ranging from 0.81 to 0.92 and indicating an acceptable level of reliability ( = 0.80), as suggested by Garson (2011)
and Hair et al. (1998). Measures of beliefs employed 15 items
for each of the three belief-constructs and three variables evaluative components. Multiplicatively combining each belief with
to
its evaluative components used the expectancy-value approach

obtain
an
overall
level
for
composites
of
each
belief
(
BB
OE
i
i,


NBj MCj ,
CBk CFk , ) as proposed by Ajzen (1991). Since computation of BBi OEi (behavioral beliefi outcome evaluationi ), NBj MCj
(normative beliefj motivation to complyj ), and CBk CFk (control
beliefsk control factork ) was through indirect measures, internal consistency is not a requirement because different accessible
beliefs are likely to be inconsistent with each other. The values
of Cronbachs
for beliefs composites
were 0.90, 0.90, and
 alpha

0.81 for
BBi OEi ,
NBj MCj , and
CBk CFk , respectively. Prior
to testing the convergent and discriminant validities, the CFA
evaluated the measurement of the overall CFA models t and
assessed, statistically, several goodness-t-indices. The CFA indicates a good model t (2 (480) = 1647.99; p < 0.001; 2 /df = 3.43;

root mean squared error of approximation [RMSEA] = 0.063; conrmatory t index [CFI] = 0.923; [NFI] = 0.900; TuckerLewis index
[TLI] = 0.914; incremental t index [IFI] = 0.927). All of these indices
indicate an adequate model t (Bollen, 1989; Schumacker and
Lomax, 2004). For behavioral intention and direct TPB measures,
evaluation of convergent validity followed the three suggestions
of Fornell and Larcker (1981) and Anderson and Gerbing (1988).
Identically, testing for convergent validity followed three criteria
for beliefs-based measures. First, the standardized factor loadings
ranged from 0.80 to 0.87 for direct TPB measures and from 0.66
to 0.93 for beliefs-based measures. According to previous research
(Bagozzi and Yi, 1988, Hair et al., 1998), TPB measures should be
above 0.60 to show that the observed construct captures over half
of the variance and is statistically signicant. Second, composite
reliabilities, ranging from 0.80 to 0.92, exceeded the 0.80 threshold
level of acceptability (Nunnally and Bernstein, 1994). Additionally,
the average variance extracted (AVE) estimates, ranging from 0.50
to 0.73, exceeded the recommended 0.50 threshold (Fornell and
Larcker, 1981), thus achieving convergent validity and the results
also show that each factor is a unidimensional construct. Conrmation of discriminant validity occurred by comparing the average
variance extracted (AVE) of each construct with the squared variance which it shares with other constructs. As illustrated in Table 1,
the factor correlation matrix indicates that each construct, except
several constructs related to attitude, met the Fornell and Larcker
(1981) thresholds and was greater than the squared correlation
coefcients between constructs, thereby achieving discriminant
validity. In summary, the measures of the proposed constructs
achieve convergent and discriminant validity and high reliability.
4.2. Structural model
As the next step, the SEM tested the validity of the model
and the hypotheses. The estimation produced normed, Chi-square,
goodness-of-t indices of (2 = 1788.145; df = 492; 2 /df = 3.634;
RMSEA = 0.065; CFI = 0.918; NFI = 0.891 TLI = 0.907, and IFI = 0.919)
and explanatory power for behavioral intention to read nutritional
labeling of R2 = 0.94. The models t appears satisfactory; thus, this
model remains for hypotheses testing and provides an acceptable
basis for t.
As expected from Hypothesis 1, which hypothesized a relationship between BBi OEi and attitude toward behavior, gained
support ( = 0.626; t = 13.626; p < 0.001). Hypothesis 2, the relationship between NBj MCj and subjective norm ( = 0.726; t = 15.014;
p < 0.001), also gained support. As proposed by Hypothesis 3,
CBk CFk had a signicant impact on perceived behavioral control
( = 0.813; t = 12.035; p < 0.001), thereby supporting Hypotheses
13. Hypothesis 4, positing a relationship between attitude toward
behavior and behavioral intention, received support ( = 0.827;
t = 15.180; p < 0.001). Hypothesis 5, the relationship between
subjective norm and behavioral intention, remains unsupported
( = 0.063; t = 1.838; p > 0.01). However, a new path added from
subjective norm to attitude shows the relationship between these
two variables to be signicant ( = 0.374; t = 8.901; p < 0.001).
Perceived behavioral control also inuences behavioral intention
( = 0.159; t = 5.113; p < 0.001); therefore, Hypothesis 6 gained support. Overall, the analyses support all hypothesized paths, and
Table 2 summarizes the ndings. The nal model appears in Fig. 2.
The ndings indicate that consumers behavioral intentions to
read nutritional labeling at restaurants associates positively with
their evaluations of the consequences of attitude toward behavior,
perceived social pressure from important referents, and perceived
control factors for reading nutritional labeling. In addition, the estimates of the standardized coefcients and t-values show that the
direct effect of attitude toward behavior on behavioral intention is
greater than the subjective norm or perceived behavioral control.

E. Kim et al. / International Journal of Hospitality Management 35 (2013) 203213

209

Table 1
Correlations matrix among the latent constructs (squared)a .
Measure

AB

SN

Attitude toward behavior

Subjective norm
Perceived behavioral control
Behavioral intention
Behavioral beliefi outcome evaluationi
Normative beliefj motivation to complyj
Control beliefsk control factork

1.00
0.742(0.55)
0.837(0.70)
0.980(0.96)
0.748(0.56)
0.642(0.41)
0.844(0.71)

PBC

BI

BBi OEi

1.00
0.617(0.38)
0.762(0.57)
0.568(0.76)
0.717(0.51)
0.673(0.45)

1.00
0.819(0.67)
0.634(0.40)
0.482(0.23)
0.804(0.65)

1.00
0.729(0.53)
0.601(0.36)
0.777(0.60)

1.00
0.615(0.38)
0.715(0.50)

Mean
SDb
Composite reliability

5.13
1.10
0.88

4.47
1.28
0.86

5.51
1.09
0.81

5.22
1.29
0.92

33.22
9.11
0.90

NBj MCj

CBk CFk

AVE

1.00
0.693(0.48)

1.00

0.56
0.56
0.50
0.73
0.60
0.66
0.50

24.75
9.72
0.90

24.83
8.81
0.80

Correlation coefcients are estimates from AMOS 7.0. All were signicant at 0.001 levels.
Standard deviation.
Note: Model measurement t: 2 = 1647.99 (df = 480, ***p < 0.001, 2 /df = 3.43), RMSEA = 0.063, CFI = 0.926, NFI = 0.900, TLI = .0914, IFI = 0.927.
b

Table 2
Standardized parameter estimatesa .
Hypothesized paths

Standardized path coefcient

t-valueb

Results

Behavioral beliefi outcome evaluationi attitude

Attitude behavioral intention
Normative beliefj motivation to complyj subjective norm
Subjective norm attitude
Subjective norm behavioral intention

0.626***
0.827***
0.726***
0.374***
0.063

13.626
15.180
15.014
8.901
1.838

Control beliefsk control factork perceived behavioral control

Perceived behavioral control behavioral intention
Model t statistics

0.813***
0.159***
2 = 1788.145, df = 492, p < 0.005,
2 /dfb = 3.634, RMSEA = 0.065,CFI = 0.918,
CFI = 0.923, NFI = .0891, TLI = .907, IFI = .919

12.035
5.113

Supported
Supported
Supported
New nding
Not supported but showed
indirect effect
Supported
Supported

a
b
***

N = 617; RMSEA = root mean square error of approximation; CFI = comparative t index; NFI = normed t index; TLI = TuckerLewis index; IFI = incremental t index.
Critical coefcient (t value) <1.96 indicates non-signicant relationship.
p < 0.001.

Further ndings indicate a positive and indirect effect from subjective norm on behavioral intention to read nutritional labeling.
To further investigate the mediating role of attitude, an estimating analysis uses the method proposed by Brown (1997) to
determine direct, indirect and total effects. A direct effect has an
impact on a variable which does not have another directly linked
variable, while an indirect effect comprises paths from one variable to another, mediated by an additional variable, and the total
effect is the sum of the direct and indirect effects (Brown, 1997).
The suggestion of mediation occurs when an independent variable has an association with a dependent variable and the former
also has an association with mediation. Full mediation exists if the
total effect is signicant while the direct effect is insignicant. Partial mediation is present if both the total and direct effects are

Fig. 2. Structural path model with parameter estimates note:

signicant. This analysis tested the inuences of an independent

variable (subjective norm) on a dependent variable (behavioral
intention) and the mediating effect of attitude toward behavior. Table 3 reports direct, indirect and total effects, and Fig. 3
depicts the full mediating role of attitude toward behavior on
behavioral intention. No signicant direct effect appears from the
subjective norm on behavioral intention; whereas, indirect effect
is signicant. These results indicate that attitude has the role of
full mediation between subjective norm and behavioral intention
(total effect: = 0.372; p = 0.001; direct effect: = 0.063; p = 0.150;
indirect effect: = 0.309; p = 0.002). Thus, the full mediating effects
of attitude toward behavior clearly demonstrate that consumers
subjective norm produces favorable behavioral intention to read
nutritional labeling at restaurants as a result of attitude toward

statistically signicant

statistically not signicant ***p < 0.001.

210

E. Kim et al. / International Journal of Hospitality Management 35 (2013) 203213

Table 3
Total effect, direct effect and indirect effect of the relationship between subjective norm and behavioral intention with dimensions of attitude toward behavior as mediating
variable.
Independent variable

Mediator variable

Dependent variable

Mediated effect

Total effect

Direct effect

Indirect effect

Subjective norm

Attitude

Behavioral intention

Full mediation

0.372*** (p = 0.001)

0.063 (p = 0.150)

0.309** (p = 0.002)

***
**

p < 0.001.
p < 0.01 (two tailed signicance: bias-corrected percentile method).

Fig. 3. The diagram of structural relationship between subjective norm and behavioral intention with dimensions of attitude toward behavior as mediating variable
statistically signicant
statistically not signicant ***p<0.001.
note:

behavior. According to Fraizier, Tix, and Barron (2004), a mediator

explains why or how its predictor leads to its variables outcome.
In this regard, the current results imply that the reason for consumers perceived subjective norm is likely to help consumers gain
a positive attitude toward behavior from the consequences of the
behavioral intention.
5. Discussion
5.1. Theoretical implications
Results of this study provide strong corroboration for the applicability of the TPB in consumers behavior toward nutritional
labeling and contribute to new theoretical insights into the leading
factors which induce intentions to read nutritional labeling among
consumers of restaurants.
First, a limited number of studies considered consumers
decision-making processes for reading nutritional labeling in context of restaurants. The current study assesses, empirically, the
causal relationships among the variables of consumers intentions
to read nutritional labeling on menus by employing the theory of
planned behavior as the researchs foundation. Being consistent
with previous studies, which applied different approaches (e.g.,
Ajzen, 1991; Armitage and Conner, 1999; Conner et al., 2002; Povey
et al., 2000), this study predicts customers behavioral intentions for
reading restaurants nutritional labeling. Furthermore, this study,
by taking the theory of planned behavior, extends understanding
of the reading of nutritional labeling.
Second, results demonstrate that applying the theory of planned
behavior has distinct predictive power for behavioral intention,
indicating applicability to the domain of consumers decisionmaking at restaurants. That is, the ndings afford a substantial
theoretical basis for studying healthy eating behavior among customers of restaurants. Thus, this study provides an important
theoretical contribution by describing and predicting the behavior and decision-making process of consumers for utilization of

nutritional labeling on menus. The demonstrated scalability and

versatility of the TPB model indicates a potentially useful and common foundation for future research into consumers behavior and
presents new informational resource for restaurants.
Third, this research examines the avenues through which attitude acts as a mediator between subjective norm and consumers
behavioral intentions. Attitudinal and normative constructs in TPB
are not as independent as predicted because the modied TPB
model with a causal path from subjective norm to attitude toward
behavior show a strong explanatory power of intention, and the
coefcient for this added path was positive and signicant. Such
mediating effects identify the impact consumers subjective norm
has on behavioral intention through attitude toward behavior. The
nding is consistent with previous studies (supported in Chang,
1998; Han et al., 2010; Oliver and Bearden, 1985; Ryu and Jang,
2006; Taylor and Todd, 1995; Vallerand et al., 1992). Also, the implications are that the formation of attitude attributed to reading
nutritional labeling, inuenced by an individuals important referents, such as family members, friends, colleagues, the media, and
experts in health and nutrition, affect formation of behavior.
5.2. Managerial implications
Although menu labels at restaurants contribute positive effects
on the restaurants, it is also true that many restaurants are fearful
about providing menu labels. Some studies identied the reasons. Of the expected obstacles, the factor increase in operational
costs was signicantly more important than factors such as lack
of knowledge and lack of time by the employees (Maestro and
Salay, 2008). Also, if menu labeling were to become widespread
among larger chains as a result of consumer demand or regulation, smaller restaurants, with fewer resources to analyze and
post nutrition information, would be disadvantaged. Menu-related
obstacles included too many menu variations, limited space on the
menu for labeling, and loss of exibility in changing the menu.
Personnel-related obstacles included difculty in training employees to implement nutrition labeling, and not enough time for
foodservice personnel to implement nutrition labeling (Almanza
et al., 1997). Also, if menu labeling were to become widespread
among larger chains as a result of consumer demand or regulation, smaller restaurants, with fewer resources to analyze and post
nutrition information, would be disadvantaged. Besides theoretical
implications, this study provides several managerial implications.
Regulations governing nutritional labeling on menus are currently
mandates or will likely be so in many countries throughout the
world. This study provides unique benets to restaurateurs by helping to establish effective strategies for the industry. A necessary
insight is consumers behavior toward use of labels, which impart
nutritional information prior to successfully marketing healthy
choices from menus. Consumers might not judge the healthy
menus of restaurants if nutritional information is absent (Kozup
et al., 2003). Therefore, such nutritional guidance is useful for
the food-away-from-home sectors strategies, especially restaurant
marketers, for designing a restaurants marketing integrity, resulting in consumers satisfaction and condence. Consequently, the
ndings of this study may support informed decision-making processes of managers in the restaurant industry as they adapt to a

E. Kim et al. / International Journal of Hospitality Management 35 (2013) 203213

changing market environment. In review of the primary outcomes

from the model, marketers should focus on the key beliefs that
signicantly predicted behavioral intention.
The outcomes suggest that the media (television, radio, newspapers, and magazines) may have a strong inuence on the habits
of reading nutrition labeling in restaurants. Experts in health and
nutrition could also be inuential for individuals. Public communication strategies for nutrition intervention would draw attention
to methods for governments focus on improving or supporting
peoples willingness to use nutritional labeling in restaurants. Furthermore, control beliefs and control factors such as format of
nutritional labeling panel and extensive lists of nutrients contributed to perceived behavioral control. Therefore, marketers
should provide consumers with specialized information so allow
recognition of having received invaluable information after reading nutritional labeling. This study helps the restaurant industrys
understanding of consumers behavior toward nutritional labeling and eventually affects the intentions of consumers, suggesting
restaurants for nutritional labeling o improve consumers satisfaction. Restaurant managers respond to changes arising from
consumers interests for nutrition by providing and promoting
healthy menu choices, and by accommodating special requests
from consumers (Granzin and Bahn, 1988). Other studies (Almanza
et al., 1997; Thomas and Mills, 2006) suggested that education
regarding nutrition, combined with nutritional labels may assist
consumers choosing healthier items from menus since doing so
provides consumers with important information that enhances
their knowledge. Thus, educational programs in combination with
campaigns for education regarding nutrition may offer potential
benets for consumers.
Moreover, disclosure, through nutritional labeling at the pointof-purchase benets not only consumers but also restaurateurs by
presenting menus appearing to support favorable attitudes and
credibility, and demonstrating that attitude toward the behavior can be useful in predicting the behavior. The studys ndings
imply that individuals important referents, such as family members, friends, colleagues, media and experts in health and nutrition
inuence formation of attitudes toward reading nutritional labeling
and encourage healthy behavior. Favorable attitudes and subjective norms for nutritional labeling among restaurants consumers
lead to positive appraisals for reading nutritional labeling. Thus,
restaurant managers could improve the probability of favorable
behavioral intentions by maximizing such referents favorable
subjective norms toward the restaurant by providing nutritional
information, which would elicit positive attitudes.
From a marketing perspective, moreover, the formation of positive attitudes is an important objective because patronage usually
accompanies positive attitude. Indeed, provision of nutritional
labeling at the point-of-purchase increases consumers satisfaction
and purchase intentions (Cranage et al., 2005), and the absence
of nutritional labeling can be a source of customers dissatisfaction (Bolton and Drew, 1991; Kangis and Passa, 1997). Cranage
et al. (2005) also suggested supplying nutritional labeling that
could potentially improve consumers perceptions, and increase
customers satisfaction, and enhance sales. Mills and Thomas
(2008) suggested the goals needed to improve consumers expectations include providing nutritional labeling on menus, leading to
improved perceptions of service, increased efciency of communication, accurate nutritional contents for menus items, and support
for consumers informed decisions.

6. Limitation and future research

Despite the theoretical and managerial implications, interpretation of this studys results must consider several limitations, which

211

require further examination and additional research. Although this

study is an initial and important step toward exploring consumers
behavioral intention to read nutritional labeling in the context
of restaurants, it is only a rst-step for the nutritional labeling
research for restaurant customers. While the present study offers
understanding of, and prediction for consumers behavior toward
nutritional labeling on menus, future research needs to achieve a
more complete picture. First, revised variables for measurement
of attitude toward behavior and behavioral intention may be necessary to obtain more robust measurements. Since this studys
measurements produced high correlations that may have complicated the study model, the representative indicators need to
be replicated to retest validity. Secondly, this study focused only
on casual-dining chain restaurants. Future research may focus on
fast-food restaurants or ne-dining restaurants. Such differing settings might be useful in overcoming possible problems related to
generalizability of the ndings and specic implications for the
restaurant industry. Last, the ndings of this study apply specifically within the demographic characteristics of the sample and
descriptive generalizations to a broader public are not necessarily
valid. Future research would benet from a more diverse population. Furthermore, restaurant consumers from different countries
may maintain different perceptions toward nutritional labeling.
Since the sample of this study is strictly Korean, generalizability
to other countries might be limited due to cultural differences in
consumers intentions toward reading nutritional labeling. Future
research might well compare this studys ndings to examine crosscultural implications.
References
Ajzen, I., 1991. The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human
Decision Processes 50 (2), 179211.
Ajzen, I., 1998. Models of human social behavior and their application to health
psychology. Psychology and Health 13 (4), 735739.
Ajzen, I., 2002. Perceived behavioral control, self-efcacy, locus of control, and
the theory of planned Behavior1. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 32 (4),
665683.
Ajzen, I., Fishbein, M., 1980. Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior.
Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Ajzen, I., Fishbein, M., 2000. Attitudes and the attitude-behavior relation: reasoned
and automatic processes. In: Strobe, W., Hewstone, M. (Eds.), European Review
of Social Psychology, vol. 11, No. 1, pp. 133.
Albright, C.L., Flora, J.A., Fortmann, S.P., 1990. Restaurant menu labeling: impact of
nutrition information on entree sales and patron attitudes. Health Education
Quarterly 17 (2), 157167.
Almanza, B.A., Nelson, D., Chai, S., 1997. Obstacles to nutrition labeling in restaurants.
Journal of the American Dietetic Association 97 (2), 157161.
Anderson, J.C., Gerbing, D.W., 1988. Structural equation modeling in practice: a
review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin 103 (3),
411423.
Armitage, C.J., Conner, M., 1999. Distinguishing perceptions of control from selfefcacy: predicting consumption of a low-fat diet using the theory of planned
behavior1. Journal of applied social psychology 29 (1), 7290.
Armitage, C.J., Conner, M., 2001. Efcacy of the theory of planned behaviour: a
meta-analytic review. The British Journal of Social Psychology/The British Psychological Society 40, 471499.
Bagozzi, R.P., Yi, Y., 1988. On the evaluation of structural equation models. Journal
of the Academy of Marketing Science 16, 7794.
Bagozzi, R.P., Wong, N., Abe, S., Bergami, M., 2000. Cultural and situational contingencies and the theory of reasoned action: application to fast food restaurant
consumption. Journal of Consumer Psychology 9 (2), 97106.
Baker, C.W., Little, T.D., Brownell, K.D., 2003. Predicting adolescent eating and activity behaviors: the role of social norms and personal agency. Health Psychology
22 (2), 189198.
Baron, R.M., Kenny, D.A., 1986. The moderatormediator variable distinction in
social psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 51 (6), 11731182.
Bassett, M.T., Dumanovsky, T., Huang, C., Silver, L.D., Young, C., Nonas, C., Frieden,
T.R., 2008. Purchasing behavior and calorie information at fast-food chains in
New York City, 2007. American Journal of Public Health 98 (8), 14571459.
Beales, H., 1980. Benets and costs of label information programs. In: Morris, L.A.,
Mazis, M.B., Barofsky, I. (Eds.), Product Labeling and Health Risks (Banbury
Report 6). Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor, NY, pp. 243260.
Bhuyan, S., 2010. Do consumers attitudes and preferences determine their FAFH
behavior? An application of the theory of planned behavior. Agribusiness 27 (2),
205220.

212

E. Kim et al. / International Journal of Hospitality Management 35 (2013) 203213

Boger, C.A., 1995. Food labeling for restaurants. Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly 36 (3), 6270.
Bollen, K.A., 1989. Structural Equations with Latent Variables. John Wiley, New York,
NY.
Bolton, R.N., Drew, J.H., 1991. A multistage model of customers assessments of
service quality and value. Journal of Consumer Research 17 (4), 375384.
Brown, R., 1997. Assessing specic mediational effects in complex theoretical models. Structural Equation Modeling 4 (2), 142156.
Burns, C., Jackson, M., Gibbons, C., Stoney, R.M., 2002. Foods prepared outside the
home: association with selected nutrients and body mass index in adult Australians. Public Health Nutrition 5 (03), 441448.
Burt, R.S., 1976. Interpretational confounding of unobserved variables in structural
equation models. Sociological Methods Research 5 (1), 352.
Burton, S., 2006. Attacking the obesity epidemic: the potential health benets of providing nutrition information in restaurants. American Journal of Public Health
96 (9), 16691675.
Burton, S., Creyer, E.H., 2004. What consumers dont know can hurt them: consumer
evaluations and disease risk perceptions of restaurant menu items. Journal of
Consumer Affairs 38 (1), 121145.
Burton, S., Creyer, E.H., Kees, J., Huggins, K., 2006. Attacking the obesity epidemic:
the potential health benets of providing nutrition information in restaurants.
American Journal of Public Health 96 (9), 16691675.
Bush, L.M., Williams, R.A., 1999. Diet and health: new problems/new solutions. Food
Policy 24 (2), 135144.
Chang, M.K., 1998. Predicting unethical behavior: a comparison of the theory of
reasoned action and the theory of planned behavior. Journal of Business Ethics
17 (16), 18251834.
Cheng, S., Lam, T., Hsu, C.H.C., 2005. Testing the sufciency of the theory of planned
behavior: a case of customer dissatisfaction responses in restaurants. International Journal of Hospitality Management 24 (4), 475492.
Chou, S.Y., Rashad, I., Grossman, M., 2008. Fast-food restaurant advertising on television and its inuence on childhood obesity. The Journal of Law Economics 51
(4), 599618.
Conklin, M.T., Lambert, C.U., Cranage, D.A., 2005. Nutrition information at point
of selection could benet college students. Topics in Clinical Nutrition 20 (2),
9096.
Conner, M., Norman, P., Bell, R., 2002. The theory of planned behavior and healthy
eating. Health Psychology 21 (2), 194201.
Cranage, D.A., Conklin, M.T., Lambert, C.U., 2005. Effect of nutrition information
in perceptions of food quality, consumption behavior and purchase intentions.
Journal of Foodservice Business Research 7 (1), 43.
Crutcheld, S., Kuchler, F., Variyam, J.N., 2001. Valuing the health benets on nutrition labeling: a case study for fresh meat and poultry products. In: Annual
Meetings of the American Agricultural.
Currie, J., Della Vigna, S., Moretti, E., Pathania, V., 2010. The effect of fast food restaurants on obesity and weight gain. American Economic Journal. Economic Policy
2 (3), 3263.
Dean, M., Raats, M.M., Shepherd, R., 2008. Moral concerns and consumer choice of
fresh and processed organic Foods1. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 38 (8),
20882107.
Dennison, C.M., Shepherd, R., 1995. Adolescent food choice: an application of the
theory of planned behaviour. Journal of Human Nutrition and Dietetics 8 (1),
923.
Dillman, D.A., 2006. Mail and Internet Surveys: The Tailored Design Method. John
Wiley and Sons, Hoboken, NJ.
Drichoutis, A.C., Nayga Jr., R.M., Lazaridis, P., 2012. Food away from home expenditures and obesity among older Europeans: are there gender differences?
Empirical Economics 42 (3), 10511078.
Drichoutis, A., Lazaridis, P., Nayga, R.M.J., 2006. Consumers use of nutritional labels:
a review of research studies and issues. Academy of Marketing Science Review
10 (9).
Duffey, K.J., Gordon-Larsen, P., Jacobs, D.R., Williams, O.D., Popkin, B.M., 2007. Differential associations of fast food and restaurant food consumption with 3-y change
in body mass index: the coronary artery risk development in young adults study.
The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 85 (1), 201208.
Dunn, R.A., 2010. The effect of fast-food availability on obesity: an analysis by gender,
race, and residential location. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 92 (4),
11491164.
Elbel, B., Gyam, J., Kersh, R., 2011. Child and adolescent fast-food choice and the
inuence of calorie labeling: a natural experiment. International Journal of Obesity 35 (4), 493500.
Elbel, B., Kersh, R., Brescoll, V.L., Dixon, L.B., 2009. Calorie labeling and food choices:
a rst look at the effects on low-income people in New York City. Health Affairs
28 (6), w1110w1121.
Ello-Martin, J.A., Ledikwe, J.H., Rolls, B.J., 2005. The inuence of food portion size
and energy density on energy intake: implications for weight management. The
American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 82 (1), 236241.
Finkelstein, E.A., Strombotne, K.L., Chan, N.L., Krieger, J., 2011. Mandatory menu
labeling in one fast-food chain in King County, Washington. American Journal
of Preventive Medicine 40 (2), 122127.
Fishbein, M., Ajzen, I., 1975. In: Reading, M. (Ed.), Belief, Attitude, Intention, and
Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research. Addison-Wesley Pub. Co,
Boston, MA.
Fornell, C., Larcker, D.F., 1981. Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research 18
(1), 3950.

Frazier, P.A., Tix, A.P., Barron, K.E., 2004. Testing moderator and mediator effects
in counseling psychology research. Journal of Counseling Psychology 51,
115134.
French, S.A., Harnack, L., Jeffery, R.W., 2000. Fast food restaurant use among women
in the pound of prevention study: dietary, behavioral and demographic correlates. International Journal of Obesity 24 (10), 13531359.
Garson, D., 2011. Structural Equation Modeling, Retrieved 30 June, 2011, from
http://faculty.chass.ncsu.edu/garson/PA765/structur.htm#biblio
Glanz, K., Hewitt, A.M., Rudd, J., 1992. Consumer behavior and nutrition education:
an integrative review. Journal of Nutrition Education 24 (5), 267277.
Granzin, K.L., Bahn, K.D., 1988. The role of consumers attitudes toward nutrition in
restaurant patronage. Journal of Nutrition Education 20 (2), 5662.
Guo, L., Xiao, J.J., Tang, C., 2009. Understanding the psychological process underlying
customer satisfaction and retention in a relational service. Journal of Business
Research 62 (11), 11521159.
Guthrie, J.F., Lin, B., Frazao, E., 2002. Role of food prepared away from home in the
American diet, 197778 versus 199496: changes and consequences. Journal of
Nutrition Education and Behavior 34 (3), 140150.
Hair, J.F., Anderson, R.E., Tatham, R.L., Black, W.C., 1998. Multivariate Data Analysis
with Readings, fth ed. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Han, H., Hsu, L.-T., Sheu, C., 2010. Application of the theory of planned behavior
to green hotel choice: testing the effect of environmental friendly activities.
Tourism Management 31 (3), 325334.
Hwang, J., Lorenzen, C.L., 2008. Effective nutrition labeling of restaurant menu and
pricing of healthy menu. Journal of Foodservice 19 (5), 270276.
Kangis, P., Passa, V., 1997. Awareness of service charges and its inuence on customer expectations and perceptions of quality in banking. The Journal of Services
Marketing 11 (2), 105117.
Kline, R.B., 1998. Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling. Guilford
Press, New York, NY.
Kozup, J.C., Creyer, E.H., Burton, S., 2003. Making healthful food choices: the inuence of health claims and nutrition information on consumers evaluations of
packaged food products and restaurant menu items. Journal of Marketing 67 (2),
1934.
Kral, T.V.E., Roe, L.S., Rolls, B.J., 2002. Does nutrition information about the energy
density of meals affect food intake in normal-weight women? Appetite 39 (2),
137145.
Lion, R., van den Kommer, M., 2008. Front-of-pack nutrition labeling: testing effectiveness of different nutrition labeling formats front-of-pack in four European
countries. Appetite 50, 5770.
Mackison, D., Wrieden, W.L., Anderson, A.S., 2009. Making an informed choice in the
catering environment: what do consumers want to know? Journal of Human
Nutrition and Dietetics 22 (6), 567573.
Maestro, V., Salay, E., 2008. Restaurant nutrition and health information in the
municipality of Campinas, So Paulo, Brazil: expectations of managers with
respect to benets and obstacles. Journal of Foodservice 19 (5), 262269.
McKay-Nesbitt, J., Manchanda, R.V., Smith, M.C., Huhmann, B.A., 2011. Effects of age,
need for cognition, and affective intensity on advertising effectiveness. Journal
of Business Research 64 (1), 1217.
Milich, R., Anderson, J., Mills, M., 1976. Effects of visual presentation of caloric values
on food buying by normal and obese persons. Perceptual and Motor Skills 42 (1),
155162.
Mills, J.E., Thomas, L., 2008. Assessing customer expectations of information provided on restaurant menus: a conrmatory factor analysis approach. Journal of
Hospitality & Tourism Research 32 (1), 6288.
Nayga Jr., R.M., 1999. Toward an understanding of consumers perceptions of food
labels. The International Food and Agribusiness Management Review 2 (1),
2945.
Nunnally, J.C., Bernstein, I.H., 1994. Psychometric Theory, third ed. McGraw-Hill,
New York, NY.
Ogden, C.L., Carroll, M.D., Curtin, L.R., Lamb, M.M., Flegal, K.M., 2010. Prevalence of
high body mass index in US children and adolescents, 20072008. Journal of
American Medical Association 303 (3), 242249.
Oliver, R.L., Bearden, W.O., 1985. Crossover effects in the theory of reasoned
action: a moderating inuence attempt. Journal of Consumer Research 12 (3),
324340.
Orfanos, P., Naska, A., Trichopoulos, D., Slimani, N., Ferrari, P., van Bakel, M., Trichopoulou, A., 2007. Eating out of home and its correlates in 10 European
countries: the European prospective investigation into cancer and nutrition
(EPIC) study. Public Health Nutrition 10 (12), 15151525.
Paeratakul, S., Ferdinand, D.P., Champagne, C.M., Ryan, D.H., Bray, G.A., 2003. Fastfood consumption among US adults and children: dietary and nutrient intake
prole. Journal of the American Dietetic Association 103 (10), 13321338.
Pawlak, R., Malinauskas, B., 2008. The use of the theory of planned behavior to assess
predictors of intention to eat fruits among 9th-grade students attending two
public high schools in eastern North Carolina. Family and Consumer Sciences
Research Journal 37 (1), 1626.
Pawlak, R., Malinauskas, B., Rivera, D., 2009. Predicting intentions to eat a healthful
diet by college baseball players: applying the theory of planned behavior. Journal
of Nutrition Education and Behavior 41 (5), 334339.
Payne, N., Jones, F., Harris, P., 2005. The impact of job strain on the predictive validity
of the theory of planned behaviour: an investigation of exercise and healthy
eating. British Journal of Health Psychology 10 (1), 115131.
Pomeranz, J.L., Brownell, K.D., 2008. Legal and public health considerations affecting
the success, reach, and impact of menu-labeling laws. American Journal of Public
Health 98 (9), 15781583.

E. Kim et al. / International Journal of Hospitality Management 35 (2013) 203213

Povey, R., Conner, M., Sparks, P., James, R., Shepherd, R., 2000. Application of the theory of planned behaviour to two dietary behaviours: roles of perceived control
and self-efcacy. British Journal of Health Psychology 5 (2), 121139.
Pulos, E., Leng, K., 2010. Evaluation of a voluntary menu-labeling program in fullservice restaurants. Journal Information 100 (6).
Roe, B., Levy, A.S., Derby, B.M., 1999. The impact of health claims on consumer search
and product evaluation outcomes: results from FDA experimental data. Journal
of Public Policy and Marketing 18 (1), 89105.
Rolls, B.J., Morris, E.L., Roe, L.S., 2002. Portion size of food affects energy intake
in normal-weight and overweight men and women. The American Journal of
Clinical Nutrition 76 (6), 12071213.
Ryu, K., Jang, S., 2006. Intention to experience local cuisine in a travel destination: the
modied theory of reasoned action. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research
30 (4), 507516.
Satia, J.A., Galanko, J.A., Siega-Riz, A.M., 2004. Eating at fast-food restaurants is associated with dietary intake, demographic, psychosocial and behavioural factors
among African Americans in North Carolina. Public Health Nutrition 7 (08),
10891096.
Schumacker, R.E., Lomax, R.G., 2004. A Beginners Guide to Structural Equation Modeling. Lawrence Earlboum, Mahwah, NJ.
Sheppard, B.H., Hartwick, J., Warshaw, P.R., 1988a. The theory of reasoned action:
a meta-analysis of past research with recommendations for modications and
future research. Journal of Consumer Research 15, 325343.
Sheppard, B.H., Hartwick, J., Warshaw, P.R., 1988b. The theory of reasoned action:
a meta-analysis of past research with recommendations for modications and
future research. Journal of Consumer Research 15, 325343.
Sparks, P., Conner, M., James, R., Shepherd, R., Povey, R., 2001. Ambivalence about
health-related behaviours: an exploration in the domain of food choice. British
Journal of Health Psychology 6 (1), 5368.
Sparks, P., Hedderley, D., Shepherd, R., 1992. An investigation into the relationship between perceived control, attitude variability and the consumption of
two common foods. European Journal of Social Psychology 22 (1), 5571.
Sproul, A.D., Canter, D.D., Schmidt, J.B., 2003. Does point-of-purchase nutrition labeling inuence meal selections? A test in an army cafeteria. Military Medicine 168
(7), 556560.

213

Stubenitsky, K., Aaron, J., Catt, S., Mela, D., 2000. The inuence of recipe modication
and nutritional information on restaurant food acceptance and macronutrient
intakes. Public Health Nutrition 3 (2), 201209.
Tarkiainen, A., Sundqvist, S., 2005. Subjective norms, attitudes and intentions
of Finnish consumers in buying organic food. British Food Journal 107 (11),
808822.
Taylor, S., Todd, P.A., 1995. Understanding information technology usage: a test of
competing models. Information Systems Research 6 (2), 144176.
Thomas, L., Mills, J.E., 2006. Consumer knowledge and expectations of restaurant
menus and their governing legislation: a qualitative assessment. Journal of Foodservice 17 (1), 622.
Thompson, O.M., Ballew, C., Resnicow, K., Must, A., Bandini, L.G., Cyr, H., Dietz, H.,
2003. Food purchased away from home as a predictor of change in BMI z-score
among girls. International Journal of Obesity 28 (2), 282289.
USDA, 2011. Food CPI and Expenditures: Analysis and Forecasts of the CPI for Food,
U.S., Department of Agriculture, Retrieved 30 June, 2011, from http://www.
ers.usda.gov/brieng/cpifoodandexpenditures/consumerpriceindex.htm
Vallerand, R.J., Deshaies, P., Cuerrier, J., Pelletier, L.G., Mongeau, C., 1992. Ajzen and
Fishbeins theory of reasoned action as applied to moral behavior: a conrmatory
analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 62 (1), 98109.
Variyam, J.N., 2005. Nutrition Labeling in the Food-Away-From-Home Sector: An
Economic Assessment. USDA-ERS Economic Research Report (No. 4). p. 28.
Verbeke, W., Vackier, I., 2005. Individual determinants of sh consumption: application of the theory of planned behaviour. Appetite 44 (1), 6782.
Wansink, B., Painter, J., van Ittersum, K., 2001. Descriptive menu labels effect on
sales. Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly 42 (6), 6872.
Wong, C.L., Mullan, B.A., 2009. Predicting breakfast consumption: an application of
the theory of planned behaviour and the investigation of past behaviour and
executive function. British Journal of Health Psychology 14 (3), 489504.
Yamamoto, J.A., Yamamoto, J.B., Yamamoto, B.E., Yamamoto, L.G., 2005. Adolescent
fast food and restaurant ordering behavior with and without calorie and fat
content menu information. Journal of Adolescent Health 37 (5), 397402.
Young, L.R., Nestle, M., 2007. Portion sizes and obesity: responses of fast-food companies. Journal of Public Health Policy 28 (2), 238248.