Journal of the American College of Nutrition

ISSN: 0731-5724 (Print) 1541-1087 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/uacn20

Sociodemographic Factors Differentiating the

Consumer and the Motivations for Functional
Food Consumption

Artur Kraus PhD, Azzurra Annunziata PhD & Riccardo Vecchio PhD

To cite this article: Artur Kraus PhD, Azzurra Annunziata PhD & Riccardo Vecchio PhD
(2017): Sociodemographic Factors Differentiating the Consumer and the Motivations
for Functional Food Consumption, Journal of the American College of Nutrition, DOI:
10.1080/07315724.2016.1228489

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07315724.2016.1228489

Published online: 09 Jan 2017.

Submit your article to this journal

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=uacn20

Download by: [The UC San Diego Library] Date: 10 January 2017, At: 03:35
Original Research

Sociodemographic Factors Differentiating the

Consumer and the Motivations for Functional Food
Consumption

Artur Kraus, PhD, Azzurra Annunziata, PhD, Riccardo Vecchio, PhD

Department of Economics, University of Rzeszow, Rzeszow, POLAND, (A.K.); Department of Economic and Legal Studies,
University of Naples ‘Parthenope’, Naples, ITALY (A.A); Department of Agriculture, University of Naples Federico II, Naples,
ITALY (R.V.)
Key words: functional food, healthy eating, food purchasing decision, health motivation, food choice, health foods, health-pro-
moting food products, sociodemographic factors, diets

Objective: The aim of this study was to determine the (1) role of gender, age, and education in the evaluation
of multidimensional criteria of the purchase of functional products, which were (a) quality and organoleptic
attributes, (b) attributes of packaging and labeling, (c) healthful properties, (d) functional components, (e) base
product (carrier) and (2) most important motives for the purchase and consumption of functional food among
consumers of different sociodemographic profiles.
Design: The data were collected in direct interviews. The sample (n D 200) consisted of 137 women and 63
men age 18–60 years. The research tool was a questionnaire divided into 4 sections. The first one included
quality attributes. The second one included healthful properties, functional components, and carriers. The third
one concerned the motives for purchasing functional food and included the consequences and values. In the
fourth section the participants were asked about gender, age, and education.
Results: Gender, age, and education differentiated the criteria influencing the decision to purchase functional
food. Women, older people (35–60 years), and those with university education attach the greatest importance to
naturalness, nutritional value, freshness, food safety, and quality guarantee. Clear differences between men and
women appear in the field of functional components, which are significantly more important for women than for
men. Gender, age, and education essentially differentiate the preferences for base product (carrier). Young men
prefer meat products in the role of functional carriers. In turn, women and older men prefer cereal products as
basic functional carriers. Young consumers are more open to high-technology food processing. Motivations are
differentiated by age and gender. Young men, as opposed to women and older men, attach less importance to
functional and psychological consequences: improvement of health, healthy eating, conscious choice, and health
promotion. Women and older men are more interested in health safety and are more responsible for their health.
Among young men, lower self-esteem can be found.
Conclusion: The analysis conducted revealed that groups of consumers are significantly different from each
other in the evaluation of the significance of each of the variables in the selection of functional food.
Sociodemographic factors differentiate the motivations for consumption of functional food.

INTRODUCTION
Healthy characteristics of food and diets are recurrent
themes in health policy, the media, and everyday discus-
sions concerning eating. In addition, government policy
focuses on the promotion of health and measures for
disease prevention. Healthy eating is essential to avoid
diet-related chronic diseases [21, 25, 33, 44]. In the light
of emerging health problems, educational initiatives for the
development of healthy eating habits become increasingly
important. As a partial response to issues of healthy nutri-
tion and disease prevention, we can witness the rise of
functional food, which, also in the face of an aging society,
can play an important role.

Address correspondence to: Artur Kraus, Department of Economics, University of Rzeszow, 35-601 Rzeszow, ul. Cwiklinskiej 2, Poland. E-mail: akraus@ur.edu.pl

Journal of the American College of Nutrition, Vol. 0, No. 0, 1–11 (2017) Ó American College of Nutrition
Published by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC

1
Functional Food

CONSUMERS AND FUNCTIONAL However, there is no consensus in the literature on the

FOODS
Consumers’ Attitudes toward Functional Food
Functional food is one of the most interesting areas of
research and innovation in the food industry [1, 41]. An impor-
tant motive for the consumption of functional food is to main-
tain good health [46]. An additional factor in the success of
functional products is trust in information and knowledge
about the effects of a particular product on health [3, 46]. The
likelihood of the purchase of functional products increases
when the consumer connects the functional characteristics
(e.g., fiber, probiotics) with the consequences of their con-
sumption (e.g., reduces the risk of diseases of the stomach and
intestines) [42].
In addition to healthful properties, the base product (carrier)
contributes to a positive perception of the functional product
[2, 46, 49]. Furthermore, the functional component affects the
perception and acceptance of functional food by consumers
[27, 38]. Moreover, the source of information on the origin of
functional components plays an important role in making the
decision to purchase the product [4]. It has been shown that
consumers are more likely to purchase functional products if a
functional component is found naturally in this food [23].
Organoleptic attributes, especially taste, are one of the most
important factors determining the choice of food and the
success of functional products [46, 53]. In addition to packag-
ing, the label is an important source of health information
[10, 22, 31]. Moreover, understanding and processing informa-
tion on the label when making the decision to purchase is
crucial for better food choices [14].
Sociodemographic Determinants
The role of sociodemographic factors in the acceptance of
functional food has been evaluated in relatively few studies,
although many studies show that the views of citizens on food
and health, as well as their dietary habits, are associated with
age, gender, and stage of life. Women are generally more
focused on healthy eating than men and tend to eat healthily
[40,35]. Concerns about healthy eating increase with age [19].
Maintaining healthy eating habits is more common among
well-educated persons [40]. The literature shows that women
are a more promising target group for functional food than
men [46]. This is confirmed by results of other studies, which
indicate that gender, age, and education are important factors
for the acceptance and consumption of functional food [17].
Studies have consistently indicated that consumers with a uni-
versity education are the most likely purchasers of functional
products [11]. Stronger women’s interest in purchasing func-
tional food [13] is particularly important given their primary
role as persons responsible for purchasing food and preparing
meals.
importance of sociodemographic characteristics for the
acceptance of functional products. Some researchers indi-
cate that demographic characteristics are only partially
related to the acceptance of functional food [16]. Some pre-
vious studies also concluded that sociodemographic factors
poorly explain the differences in the acceptance of func-
tional food [47, 52]. Research by Niva and M€akel€a [36]
challenged these findings, suggesting that one of the causes
of the poor explanatory power of sociodemographic factors
may be the multidimensionality of acceptance [47].
Research by Ares and Gambaro [5] showed that the gender
and age of respondents statistically significantly differenti-
ated the preferences for a variety of functional products and
opinions about them. It was found that age and level of edu-
cation were important predictors of consumers’ awareness
of functional components in functional food [9].
The variety of available research shows that sociodemo-
graphic characteristics have appeared as potential determinants
of acceptance of functional food. Given the competitive envi-
ronment for functional food, an understanding of segments of
the consumer market is considered a key factor of success [54].
In particular, the identification and evaluation of attributes is
important, and determination of their levels to reflect the charac-
teristics of the product are important to the consumer [27, 28].
Acting for specific groups of consumers would create opportuni-
ties for better adaptation of functional food offer to the require-
ments of individual groups of consumers. It could also provide
valuable support for actions related to promotion and marketing
of functional food products. This study aims to determine the
role of sociodemographic factors in the evaluation of multidi-
mensional criteria for the purchase of functional products and to
determine the motivations for consumption of functional food
among consumers of various sociodemographic profiles.
METHODOLOGY
Methods and Procedures
Information on the Study
The study was conducted at the “MEDYK” medical centers
in Rzeszow and Lancut. The study was conducted within the
framework of the program “Prevention of Overweight and
Obesity and Chronic Diseases through Public Education on
Nutrition and Physical Activity” carried out at these medical
centers. The program lasted 12 weeks and included meetings
with a dietitian and classes with a physiotherapist according to
the following schedule: (1) classes with a physiotherapist twice
a week for 90 minutes (gymnastics, aerobics, exercises at the
swimming pool); (2) meetings with a dietitian with individual
dietary advice in the first 2 weeks and dietary workshops
(approximately 60 minutes) in weeks 6 and 11 in groups of up

2 VOL. 0, NO. 0
 Functional Food

to 6 persons. There were 240 participants. The research Table 1. Characteristics of Participants and Sociodemographic
involved 200 persons, 137 women and 63 men, who purchased Profiles of Clusters (N D 200)
functional foods and agreed to participate in the research. Peo-
Gender Age Education
ple aged 18–60 participated in the program.
Category N Category N Category N
Questionnaire Structure Female 137 18–34 years 58 Secondary 21
University education 37
The research tool was a specially designed questionnaire that
35–60 years 79 Secondary 35
was divided into four sections. The first section contained the University education 44
perceived quality attributes of functional food (organoleptic Male 63 18–34 years 25 Secondary 14
attributes, attributes of packaging and labeling). The second sec- University education 11
35–60 years 38 Secondary 11
tion consisted of health benefits, functional components, and car-
University education 27
riers. The third section concerned the motives for purchasing
functional food and included consequences and values. The con-
sequences were divided into functional and psychological. The Data Analysis
values were divided into instrumental values and final ones.
Hypotheses about the diversity of opinion expressed in the
(Instrumental [basic] values are related to general ways of behav-
questionnaire, occurring between the created segments of
ior. These are individual beliefs. The values of the second group
respondents, were verified by a multidimensional method of
are secondary or of lower significance. They constitute an auxil-
cluster analysis. Before starting the analysis, participants were
iary element in achieving the highest (autotelic) values and are
grouped according to 3 criteria—gender, age, and education—
executive in nature and serve to pursue higher aims. Final (auto-
in such a way as to form groups of uniform characteristics
telic) values are the most important aims of human life. These
indicated by these criteria. In this way, 8 segments were built—
are autonomous, principal, central values occupying the central
elements subsequently subjected to agglomeration (Table 1).
place in the hierarchy of values. The realization of these values
Homogeneous clusters were determined on the basis of 8
is good per se [39].) In the fourth section the participants were
multidimensional criteria, specifically: (1) organoleptic and
asked about gender, age, and education. These issues were devel-
quality attributes, (2) attributes of packaging and labeling, (3)
oped on the basis of a literature review [12, 26, 30, 43, 48]
healthful properties, (4) functional components, (5) base prod-
uct (carrier), (6) functional consequences, (7) psychological
The Survey Procedure consequences, and (8) values (instrumental and final). The
bases for the analysis were calculated for each of the isolated
In order to carry out the survey, the participants were
segments, and values of the arithmetic mean were calculated
divided into groups of 25. The survey was conducted by a
according to the answers to the questionnaire, which concerned
member of the research team. The interview procedure started
a given criterion.
with a brief introduction. The respondents were informed about
Ward’s agglomeration method was applied for the calcu-
the purpose of the survey. At the beginning of the session, to
lations. The basis of agglomeration was Euclidean distance.
ensure that the term functional food was understood, the defini-
Following cluster analysis, the data were examined to verify
tion of functional food was used:
the significance of differences between the average levels of
a food product can only be considered functional if together
each element (making up the multidimensional criterion of
with the basic nutritional impact it has beneficial effects on one creation of clusters) in the designated clusters. The null
or more functions of the human organism thus either improving hypothesis of equality of the average value was verified by
the general and physical conditions or/and decreasing the risk the Fisher-Snedecor F-test, and post hoc analysis was car-
of the evolution of diseases. The amount of intake and form of
the functional food should be as it is normally expected for die-
ried out by Tukey’s test. This allowed identification of
tary purposes. Therefore, it could not be in the form of pill or homogeneous groups of arithmetic means. This verification
capsule just as normal food form. [18, p. 26] was performed at a significance level a D 0.05. Statistical
analysis was carried out using the package StatSoft Polska
In addition, the questionnaire contained the definition so Statistica 9 (Krakow, Poland).
that the respondents were able to become freely acquainted
with it. Later, the participants were asked to evaluate each of
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
the attributes in terms of their importance when purchasing
functional food. Evaluation of each of the attributes was per-
formed according to a 5-point scale with 1 D not important at Characteristics of Participants
all and 5 D very important. The amount of time allowed to The final sample (N D 200) consisted of 137 (68.5%)
complete the questionnaire was up to 30 minutes. women and 63 (31.5%) men. The majority of the

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF NUTRITION 3

Functional Food
participants had a university education (119, 59.50%), and
81 (40.50%) of the participants had secondary education.
Among the participants, 117 (58.50%) were in the 34C age
group, and the smaller age group consisted of people
between the ages of 18 and 34 (83, 41.5%). A detailed
description of the sample and the sociodemographic profile
is included in Table 1.
Sociodemographic Characteristics Differentiating
the Consumer of Functional Food
Quality and Organoleptic Attributes
Four clusters were identified. Cluster A (n D 106) consisted
mainly of women (74.5%) aged 35–60 years (Table 2). Most
consumers in this group had a university education (67%).
This segment is characterized by a higher level of validity of
the attribute “natural product,” a high level of validity of the
attribute “safe food,” and a slightly lower level of validity of
the attribute “nice taste” compared to other clusters (Table 3).
This cluster includes mainly older, well-educated women who
are usually responsible for selecting food and preparing meals.
For those consumers the naturalness of the product and its
safety were the basic determinants in the choice of food.
Because our daily diet increasingly consists of processed ready
meals, the ideal of “naturalness” still prevails. For many peo-
ple, natural or unprocessed food free from additives represents
proper and healthy food [15]. Moreover, results of studies have
shown that the naturalness of the functional component is well
perceived and highly appreciated by consumers. Naturally
occurring nutrients are considered to be more favorable than
fortification [45].
Cluster B (n D 14) consists exclusively of young men (18–
34 years) with a medium level of education. This group of con-
sumers attaches less importance to the naturalness of the prod-
uct as well as food safety. Less concern for the naturalness and
safety of food may partly result from the fact that generally it
is women who are responsible for the choice of food. Young
men do not attach much importance to these attributes because
they eat meals prepared by women. On the other hand, young
people seem to be optimistic about the new technologies in
food production.
Cluster C (n D 11) is the smallest in this division and con-
sists of older men (35–60 years) with secondary education.
Men forming cluster C are similar to the persons forming clus-
ter A except that to the greatest extent they pay attention to the
taste properties of consumed food. Good taste is crucial for
achieving market success of the functional product. The studies
point to the fundamental role of taste as a factor driving con-
sumers’ choices of functional products [20, 53].
Cluster D (n D 69) consists mainly of young women (18–
34 years old) with a university education (69.6%). This cluster
is characterized by a high level of validity of the attribute “safe
food” and a high level of validity of the attribute “nice taste.”
4 VOL. 0, NO. 0
The studies consistently confirm that the attribute “safe and
healthy product” plays an important role in making the deci-
sion to purchase functional food [29]. The naturalness of the
product is of less significance for this group, which may result
from the fact that cluster D consists mainly of young women
(84.1%) who are more open to food produced with the use of
high technology. A similar attitude toward naturalness is
shown by young men (cluster B). An interesting observation
from the analysis is that young consumers are more open to
new technologies in food production.
Attributes of Packaging and Labeling
Three clusters were identified. Cluster A (n D 25) consists
only of young men aged 18–34 years (Table 2). This segment
of consumers pays least attention to environmentally friendly
packaging. For men from this segment the expiration date,
guarantee of quality, and nutritional value are significantly less
important when choosing food in comparison with the other
two clusters (Table 3).
Cluster B (n D 46) is composed of men and women aged
35–60 years (76% women) with an average level of education.
This segment is distinguished by a higher level of validity of
the attribute “environmentally friendly packaging.” The con-
sumers in this segment pay more attention to the nutritional
value and guarantee of quality when choosing food. Purchasers
want to be sure of the quality of functional products certified
by meeting International Organization for Standardization
(ISO) and hazard analysis and critical control points (HACCP)
requirements that guarantee high quality. In addition, informa-
tion on the label such as healthful properties and nutritional
values plays a leading role in the decision to purchase func-
tional food. They help consumers to make a conscious food
choice [29, 32].
Finally, cluster C, covering the largest group of consumers
(n D 129), consists mainly of women (79.1%), with the major-
ity aged 35–60 years (55%). This cluster is dominated by
respondents with a university education (83.7%). This segment
of consumers pays most attention to the expiration date when
making food choices. This group seems to be very interested in
the nutritional value of the product. This cluster consists
mostly of women who most often are responsible for preparing
meals at home. In this connection, the freshness of the product
and its nutritional value are the primary determinants of food
choices. This group of consumers wants to receive a fresh
product (date of production) that is characterized by a high
nutritional value. As has been shown in other studies, freshness
and nutritional value play an important role in the purchase of
functional food [29]. An interesting observation from the anal-
ysis is that young men attach less importance to the nutritional
value, freshness, and guarantee of product quality. They also
seem to not pay much attention to the impact of the packaging
on the natural environment.
 Table 2. Sociodemographic Differentiation of Identified Clusters; Attributes of Functional Food (n D 200), in Percentage

Quality Attributes and Organoleptic Properties Attributes of Packaging and Label Healthful Properties Functional Component Base Product (Carrier)
Cluster Cluster Cluster Cluster Cluster

A B C D A B C A B C A B A B C
(n D 106; (n D 14; (n D 11; (n D 69; (n D 25; (n D 46; (n D 129; (n D 96; (n D 46; (n D 58; (n D 52; (n D 148; (n D 25; (n D 108; (n D 77;
53%) 7%) 5.5%) 34.5%) 12.5%) 23%) 64.5%) 48%) 23%) 29%) 26%) 74%) 12.5%) 54%) 38.5%)

Gender
Female 74.5 — — 84.1 — 76.0 79.1 45.8 76.0 100 — 92.6 — 75.0 85.7

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF NUTRITION

Male 25.5 100 100 15.9 100 24.0 20.9 54.2 24.0 — 100 7.4 100 25.0 14.3
Age
18–34 years — 100 — 100 100 — 45.0 26.0 100 100 48.1 39.2 100 34.3 27.3
35–60 years 100 — 100 — — 100 55.0 74.0 — — 51.9 60.8 — 65.7 72.7
Education
Secondary 33.0 100 100 30.4 56.0 100 16.3 14.6 100 36.2 26.9 45.3 56.0 — 100
University 67.0 — — 69.6 44.0 — 83.7 85.4 — 63.8 73.1 54.7 44.0 100 —
education
Functional Food

5
Functional Food

Table 3. Importance of Attributes of Functional Food—Differentiation between the Separated Clusters (Results of Variance
Analysis)

Cluster

A B C D

Attribute Mean F (p)

Quality attributes and organoleptic properties n D 106 n D 14 n D 11 n D 69

Safe food (food free of toxic substances) 4.77 b 4.29 a 4.64 b 4.62 b 6.36* (0.049)
Pure product 4.16 3.79 4.18 3.99 1.87 (0.275)
Quality of product 4.25 4.29 4.45 4.20 0.95 (0.498)
Natural product 4.44 c 4.07 a 4.27 b 4.06 a 8.31* (0.034)
Healthy product 4.65 4.14 4.64 4.49 4.87 (0.080)
Nice taste 4.22 a 4.14 a 4.82 c 4.42 b 47.38* (0.001)
Attributes of packaging and label n D 25 n D 46 n D 129
Environmentally friendly packaging 3.39 a 4.22 c 3.83 b — 26.95* (0.002)
Practical packaging 4.03 4.06 3.98 — 0.24 (0.797)
Production date 4.04 4.24 4.10 — 0.70 (0.540)
Expiration date 4.46 a 4.74 b 4.86 b — 7.87* (0.029)
Guarantee of quality (e.g., ISO, HACCP) 3.63 a 4.16 b 3.96 b — 8.28* (0.026)
Information on the healthful properties of the product 3.92 4.09 4.21 — 4.25 (0.080)
Nutritional value 3.68 a 4.23 b 4.13 b — 44.62* (0.001)
Healthful properties n D 96 n D 46 n D 58
Provides components necessary for well-being 3.74 3.91 3.99 — 4.54 (0.075)
Improves digestion 3.27 3.76 3.43 — 3.03 (0.137)
Improves physical condition 3.74 4.13 4.04 — 2.47 (0.179)
Improves functioning of motor system 3.97 a 4.05 b 4.16 b — 7.39* (0.032)
Improves memory 3.85 4.10 b 4.04 b — 5.54* (0.047)
Helps to maintain a youthful appearance 4.01 a 4.36 b 4.27 b — 7.33* (0.032)
Helps to maintain correct body weight 3.60 a 4.09 b 4.01 b — 6.37* (0.042)
Helps to maintain correct cholesterol level 3.96 4.43 4.31 — 3.95 (0.094)
Strengthens eyesight 3.97 a 4.42 b 4.12 a — 26.77* (0.002)
Strengthens hair and nails 3.54 a 3.92 b 4.35 c — 13.46* (0.010)
Strengthens the immune system 4.16 a 4.38 b 4.33 b — 7.29* (0.033)
Reduces stress 3.67 a 4.12 b 4.17 b — 18.03* (0.005)
Reduces the risk of diseases of the stomach and intestines 3.74 4.16 3.73 — 2.21 (0.205)
Reduces the risk of cardiovascular diseases 3.96 4.38 3.83 — 4.92 (0.066)
Reduces the risk of certain cancers 4.10 4.53 4.06 — 3.19 (0.128)
Reduces the risk of osteoporosis 3.87 a 4.36 b 3.80 a — 6.07* (0.046)
Reduces the risk of dementia 3.85 a 4.25 b 3.80 a — 9.30* (0.021)
Functional component n D 52 n D 148
Dietary fiber 3.60 4.14 — — 18.89* (0.005)
Omega—3 fatty acids 3.87 4.06 — — 0.77 (0.415)
Minerals (magnesium, zinc, iron, iodine, phosphorus) 3.91 4.27 — — 22.31* (0.003)
Calcium 3.96 4.29 — — 13.96* (0.010)
Vitamin A 3.76 4.22 — — 32.07* (0.001)
B vitamins (B1, B2, B3, B6, B12) 3.85 4.26 — — 19.57* (0.004)
Vitamin C 3.87 4.22 — — 12.29* (0.013)
Vitamin D 3.84 4.19 — — 14.09* (0.009)
Vitamin E 3.82 4.22 — — 22.83* (0.003)
Base product (carrier) n D 25 n D 108 n D 77
Mixtures of vegetables and fruits 3.82 3.89 4.13 — 1.69 (0.275)
Bread 3.94 4.12 4.18 — 1.02 (0.435)
Cereal products 3.82 a 3.93 a 4.15 b — 5.94* (0.041)
Meat products 4.25 c 3.76 a 4.05 b — 10.07* (0.018)
Dairy products 4.12 4.17 4.36 — 2.21 (0.205)

*Indicates that the calculated value of the F-test allows rejection of the null hypothesis (a D 0.05). Identical letters indicate a lack of significant difference between the
clusters in the post hoc analysis.

Healthful Properties
(Table 2). Cluster A included mostly men (54.2%) and persons
Three clusters were identified. Cluster A (n D 96) consists aged 35–60 years (74%). People with a university education
of diverse consumers in terms of gender, age, and education (85.4%) prevailed in this group. This segment was isolated due

6 VOL. 0, NO. 0

to the lower level of importance of the healthful properties
“improves memory,” “helps to maintain a youthful appear-
ance,” “helps to maintain correct body weight,” “strengthens
hair and nails,” “strengthens the immune system,” and
“reduces stress” (Table 3). This group of consumers is not con-
cerned with their appearance because they gave lower ratings
to health properties connected with appearance. This is likely
because the segment is dominated by men and older respond-
ents, who are most likely looking for other healthful properties.
This segment is not particularly interested in healthful proper-
ties connected with the improvement of memory and the reduc-
tion of stress.
Clusters B (n D 46) and C (n D 58) consist entirely of
young persons (18–34 years). In terms of gender, these 2 clus-
ters consist mainly of women (B, 76%; C, 100%). The consum-
ers in these segments show more interest in the healthful
properties connected with appearance in an effort to maintain
or improve their existing appearance. This group of people
also seems to be interested in strengthening eyesight and reduc-
ing stress. Paying more attention to these healthful properties
may result from daily activities related to work and family
responsibilities. Cluster B gave the highest ratings to health
properties connected with a reduction in the risk of osteoporo-
sis and dementia. This result indicates that young women with
a secondary education wish to carry out preventive activities in
this regard. These 2 segments are also very interested in
strengthening the immune system. There are no reports in the
literature regarding the diversity of consumers in the field of
healthful properties. Studies carried out thus far have revealed
the great importance of such healthful properties as
“strengthens the body’s defense mechanisms,” “reduces the
risk of coronary heart disease,” “lowers cholesterol level,” and
“improves physical fitness” [15, 29]. Other studies [7] argue
that older people explain their intentions to purchase mainly
from the point of view of disease prevention. Moreover, Bogue
and Ryan [8] showed that older consumers are more concerned
with a reduction in the risk of a disease, whereas younger con-
sumers are more interested in increasing energy levels.
Functional Component
Two clusters were identified. Cluster A (n D 52) consists
only of men (Table 2), most with a university education
(73.1%). In terms of age there is noticeable a small predomi-
nance of men in age 35–60 years (51.9%).
Cluster B (n D 148) includes all women, with a minority of
men (7.4%). In this group, older consumers age 34–60 years
(60.8%) with a university education (54.7%) predominate.
These 2 clusters are groups of consumers significantly differing
in their opinion on the importance of functional components.
For the segment forming cluster B the importance of all func-
tional components listed in Table 3 is higher than that for seg-
ment A. The results of studies show that women and older and
JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF NUTRITION
Functional Food
better educated persons attach more importance to functional
components. For these consumers the content of functional
components was an important determinant in food choices.
The recent literature indicates that age and level of education
are important predictors of consumers’ awareness of functional
components in food [9]. An interesting observation from the
analysis is that these are women who attach the greatest impor-
tance to the content of functional components.
Base Product (Carrier)
Three clusters were identified. Cluster A (n D 25) consists
only of young men aged 18–34 years (Table 2). This cluster
was isolated due to the higher level of preference for meat
products as functional carriers (Table 3). This group of con-
sumers seems to be the most interested in functional meat prod-
ucts. Noteworthy is the inclusion of meat products as good
carriers for functional products. The development of functional
meat products may be a useful solution with a high market
potential and consequent health benefits [6, 37].
Cluster B (n D 108) consists mainly of women (75%), with
a small proportion of men (25%). This group consists mostly
of people aged 35–60 years (65.7%). The whole group had a
university education. Cluster B is distinguished by the lower
level of preference for meat products as carriers for functional
products.
Cluster C (n D 77) mainly includes women (85.7%). In this
group consumers aged 35–60 years (72.7%) prevail, with all
having a secondary education. Cluster C is distinguished by
the higher level of preference for cereal products as carriers for
functional products. The results of studies have revealed that
women who make up clusters B and C prefer meat products
the least, showing greater preferences for cereal products as
basic functional carriers. Greater preference for cereal products
as functional carriers is also observed among older well-edu-
cated men. Numerous literature sources emphasize that the
acceptance of functional products mainly depends on the basic
product used as a carrier for the functional element [24, 49,
51]. Our results have revealed differences between women and
young men in preferences for functional carriers.
Sociodemographic Factors Differentiating
Motivations for the Purchase and Consumption of
Functional Food
Functional Consequences
Four clusters were identified. Cluster A (n D 38) consists
only of men primarily aged 35–60 years (71.1%) with a univer-
sity education (Table 4). This group has been isolated due to a
lower level of importance of improved appearance as a func-
tional consequence (Table 5). This group of consumers does
not seem to be particularly interested in improving their
7
Functional Food

Table 4. Sociodemographic Differentiation of the Identified Clusters, Consequences and Values (n D 200), in Percentage

Instrumental (Basic) and Final

Functional Consequences Psychological Consequences (Autotelic) Values
Cluster Cluster Cluster

A B C D A B C A B
(n D 38; (n D 14; (n D 79; (n D 69; (n D 38; (n D 14; (n D 148; (n D 25; (n D 175;
19%) 7%) 39.5%) 34.5%) 19%) 7%) 74%) 12.5%) 87.5%)

Gender
Female — — 100 84.1 — — 92.6 — 78.3
Male 100 100 — 15.9 100 100 7.4 100 21.7
Age
18–34 years 28.9 100 — 84.1 28.9 100 39.2 100 33.1
35–60 years 71.1 — 100 15.9 71.1 — 60.8 — 66.9
Education
Secondary — 100 44.3 46.4 — 100 45.3 56.0 38.3
University 100 — 55.7 53.6 100 — 54.7 44.0 61.7
education

appearance improvement as a result of the consumption of
functional food.
Cluster B (n D 14) is the smallest one in this division and
consists exclusively of young men (18–34 years) with a sec-
ondary education. For young men in cluster B the level of
importance of the consequences “improvement of health,”
“needs of organism,” and “healthy eating” is lower compared
to the other clusters. The results of studies show that young
men, who most likely enjoy good health, do not expect to
improve their health with the consumption of functional food.
Most likely, they may aim to maintain their current health con-
dition through functional food. Moreover, they attach less
importance to a healthy diet in comparison to other clusters.
Clusters C (n D 79) and D (n D 69) consist mainly of
women (C, 100%; D, 84.1%). Cluster C consists exclusively of
older women (35–60 years), whereas in cluster D young people
aged 18–34 years (84.1%) predominate. Cluster C differs from
cluster D with a lower level of validity of improved appearance
as a functional consequence. This means that mainly for young
people, especially women, the consumption of functional food

Table 5. Importance of Consequences and Values—Differentiation between the Separated Clusters (Results of Variance Analysis)

Cluster

A B C D

Consequences/Values Mean F (p)

Functional consequences n D 38 n D 14 n D 79 n D 69
Improved health 4.50 b 3.93 a 4.52 b 4.50 b 7.41* (0.041)
Needs of organism (providing the organism with nutrients) 4.26 b 3.86 a 4.33 b 4.36 b 5.98* (0.049)
Improvement of external appearance 3.49 a 3.57 a 3.91 b 4.35 c 45.75* (0.001)
Healthy nutrition 4.24 b 3.64 a 4.56 c 4.46 c 99.46* (0.000)
Psychological consequences n D 38 n D 14 n D 148
Promotion of health 3.99 b 3.50 a 3.94 b — 9.68* (0.019)
Pleasure of eating 3.75 4.07 3.92 — 3.31 (0.121)
Conscious choice 3.93 a 3.86 a 4.31 b — 15.55* (0.007)
Instrumental (basic) values n D 25 n D 175
Care for health 3.63 3.92 — — 1.78 (0.231)
Responsibility for health 4.10 4.34 — — 2.26 (0.184)
Final (autotelic) values n D 25 n D 175
Health safety 4.14 4.34 — — 3.76 (0.100)
Good health and long life 4.32 4.47 — — 4.32 (0.082)
Inner harmony 3.75 4.16 — — 3.77 (0.100)
Self-respect 3.80 4.20 — — 40.78* (0.001)
Self-belief 3.62 4.13 — — 22.02* (0.003)

*Indicates that the calculated value of the F-test allows rejection of the null hypothesis (a D 0.05). Identical letters indicate a lack of significant difference between the
clusters in the post hoc analysis.

8 VOL. 0, NO. 0

should be connected with the consequence in the form of
improved appearance, which is the external sign of a healthy
diet; in particular for this group of consumers, it is a pleasant
consequence of effective and purposeful action. An improved
appearance reinforces positive thinking about oneself and addi-
tionally motivates one to act. As has been indicated in previous
studies [26, 34], healthy eating, improved health, eating enjoy-
ment, and improved physical appearance are important motiva-
tors in purchasing and consuming functional food.
Psychological Consequences
Three clusters were defined. Clusters A (n D 38) and B (n D
14) consist only of men (Table 4). In cluster A there were pre-
dominately older men aged 35–60 years (71.1%) with a univer-
sity education, whereas cluster B consists only of young men
(18–34 years) with a secondary education. Cluster A was iso-
lated due to the highest level of importance of the consequence
“health promotion” and a high level of importance of the con-
sequence “conscious choice.” In contrast, cluster A and cluster
B show the lowest level of importance of “promotion of
health” (Table 5).
Cluster C (n D 148) is mostly women, with men constitut-
ing only 7.4%. In cluster C persons aged 35–60 years (60.8%)
predominate. Cluster C is characterized by the higher level of
importance of the consequence “conscious choice” and a high
level of importance of the consequence “promotion of health.”
Health promotion in the psychological sense is the process of
acquiring the skills to control and influence one’s own health.
This is an intentional activity that can be developed by increas-
ing individual and social awareness regarding issues concern-
ing health.
The results of studies reveal that women and older men
(35–60 years) appreciate the ability to control and influence
health. For these 2 groups of consumers “conscious choice”
has important consequences. From the above it appears that
these 2 segments of consumers do not want to make random
decisions. They want to decide themselves and make conscious
choices in achieving their goal, which is to maintain good
health. The results of studies reveal that health promotion and
conscious choice are less important for young men (18–34
years). According to other studies, health promotion is a major
motivator for the purchase and consumption of functional food
[26, 29].
Instrumental (Basic) and Final (Autotelic) Values
Two clusters were identified. Cluster A (n D 25) consists
only of young men (18–34 years). Cluster B (n D 175) consists
mostly of women, with a smaller proportion of men (21.1%).
In this group, older people aged 35–60 years (66.9%) predomi-
nate, most with a university education (61.7%; Table 4). For
the consumers making up cluster B the importance of all values
listed in Table 5 is higher than for consumers making up
JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF NUTRITION
Functional Food
cluster A (the differences for the values “self-respect” and
“self-belief” are statistically significant).
The results of studies show that gender and age differentiate
motivations. For women and older men, safety and good health
and long life are the most important motivators for the con-
sumption of functional foods. Differences between the groups
also appear in the assessment of internal harmony, which
allows achieving inner balance and peace. One of the bases for
achieving inner peace is taking care of oneself and one’s
health. As research by Jonas and Beckmann [26] shows, long
life and good health are major determinants motivating the
consumption of functional food. The greatest differences
between clusters A and B are shown in the evaluation of the
values “self-respect” and “self-belief.” These 2 values can be
defined as self-esteem. In other words, self-esteem is the way
we think and speak about ourselves. The way we think about
ourselves shapes our image and the way we refer to each other.
The results of studies reveal that the group of young men has
lower self-esteem. Other results of studies also point to the
great importance of the values of security, internal harmony,
and self-confidence as important motivators for purchasing
functional food [29]. An interesting observation from the anal-
ysis is that women and older men are more interested in health
safety and are more responsible for health.
CONCLUSIONS
Gender, age, and education differentiated ratings of the cri-
teria influencing the decisions to purchase functional food. The
research analysis has shown that mainly women, older persons,
and consumers with a university education attach the greatest
importance to the naturalness of the product and food safety.
Younger consumers attach less importance to naturalness and
seem to be more open to high-technology food processing.
Women and older men, in contrast to younger men, attach great
importance to the freshness of the product and its nutritional
value when making food choices. Taking healthful properties
into consideration, the differences in the evaluation appear in
the group of that which may generally lead to improved
appearance. Older persons show a lower level of importance of
healthful properties connected to appearance. Young people
would be more willing to seek healthful properties that could
contribute to improved appearance.
Clear differences between women and men appear in the
field of functional components. For women the content of func-
tional components was an important determinant in food
choices. Gender, age, and education essentially differentiate
preferences for the base product (carrier). Young men to the
greatest extent prefer meat products as a functional carrier.
Women, older men, and consumers with higher education are
more interested in cereal products in the role of functional
carriers.
9
Functional Food
Sociodemographic factors differentiate functional and psy-
chological consequences. Men attach less importance to
improved appearance as a consequence of functional foods. In
addition, young men do not seem to be particularly interested
in the improvement of health and they attach less importance
to a healthy diet. Young women would like to bring together
the consumption of functional foods with consequent improved
appearance. The differences among consumers arise in the
evaluation of psychological consequences. Women, older men,
and consumers with a university education highly rate the abil-
ity to control and influence health by making conscious choices
(promotion of health, conscious choice). Health promotion is
less important to young men with a secondary education. There
appear to be essential differences in motivations between
young men and other consumers. We found lower self-esteem
among young men.
Current research has shown differences in consumers of
functional food. The analysis revealed that groups of consum-
ers are significantly different from each other in the evaluation
of the significance of individual variables when making food
choices. Sociodemographic factors differentiate the motiva-
tions for consumption of functional food. The results of studies
suggest that functional food manufacturers should create mar-
keting strategies suited to different segments. The observed
differences related to gender, age, and education show that
there is a need for further research among individual groups
when designing food. Knowledge about which attributes of the
product are used by consumers from individual segments to
infer the presence of the desired benefits allows for clearer
specification of product development [29, 50]. The obtained
knowledge will allow adjustment of marketing efforts toward
relevant groups of consumers. Due to this preparation, the
actions carried out by the interested subjects will be much
more effective.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors thank the anonymous reviewers for their
helpful and constructive comments that greatly contributed
to improving the final version of the article. The authors
also thank the “MEDYK” Medical Centers in Rzeszow and
Lancut for assistance in carrying out the research. The
authors would also like to thank all participants for taking
part in the research.
FUNDING
Research was performed under the grant funded by the Rec-
tor of the University of Rzeszow (DN/GrU/EK/4/2012).
10
REFERENCES
1. Annunziata A, Vecchio R: Functional foods development in the
European market: a consumer perspective. J Funct Foods 3:223–
228, 2011.
2. Annunziata A, Vecchio R: Consumer perception of functional
foods: a conjoint analysis with probiotics. Food Qual Prefer
28:348–355, 2013.
3. Annunziata A, Vecchio R, Kraus A: Awareness and preference for
functional foods: the perspective of older Italian consumers. Int J
Consum Stud 39:352–361, 2015.
4. Ares G, Gimenez A, Gambaro A: Does information about the
source of functional ingredients influence consumer perception of
functional milk desserts? J Sci Food Agric 88:2061–2068, 2008.
5. Ares G, Gambaro A: Influence of gender, age and motives under-
lying food choice on perceived healthiness and willingness to try
functional foods. Appetite 49:148–158, 2007.
6. Baba Y, Kallas Z, Costa-Font M, Gil JM, Realini CE: Impact of
hedonic evaluation on consumers’ preferences for beef attributes
including its enrichment with n-3 and CLA fatty acids. Meat Sci
111:9–17, 2016.
7. Bhaskaran S, Hardley F: Buyers beliefs, attitudes and behavior:
foods with therapeutic claims. J Consum Mark 19:591–606, 2002.
8. Bogue J, Ryan M: “Market-Oriented New Product Development:
Functional Foods and the Irish Consumer.” Cork: Department of
Food Economics, National University of Ireland, 2000. Agribusi-
ness Discussion Paper 27.
9. Bornkessela S, Br€oringa S, Omta, SWF, van Trijp H: What deter-
mines ingredient awareness of consumers? A study on ten func-
tional food ingredients. Food Qual Prefer 32:330–339, 2014.
10. Bosman MJC, Van der Merwe D, Ellis SM, Jerling JC, Badham J:
South African adult metropolitan consumers’ opinions and use of
health information on food labels. Br Food J 116:30–43, 2014.
11. Brecic R, Gorton M, Barjolle D: Understanding variations in the
consumption of functional foods—evidence from Croatia. Br
Food J 116:662–675, 2014.
12. Chryssohoidis GM, Krystallis A: Organic consumers personal val-
ues research: testing and validating the list of values (LOV) scale
and implementing a value-based segmentation task. Food Qual
Prefer 16:585–599, 2005.
13. Childs NM, Poryzees GH: Foods that help prevent disease: con-
sumer attitudes and public policy implications. J Consum Mark
14:433–447, 1997.
14. Choi J: The impact of disclosure of nutrition information on con-
sumers’ behavioral intention in Korea. J Am Coll Nutr 34:378–
384, 2015.
15. Crofton EC, Markey A, Scannell AGM: Consumers’ expectations
and needs towards healthy cereal based snacks: an exploratory
study among Irish adults. Br Food J 115:1130–1148, 2013.
16. Dagevos H: Consumers as four-faced creatures. Looking at food
consumption from the perspective of contemporary consumers.
Appetite 45:32–39, 2005.
17. de Jong N, Ocke MC, Branderhorst HAC, Friele R: Demographic
and lifestyle characteristics of functional food consumers and die-
tary supplement users. Br J Nutr 89:273–281, 2003.
VOL. 0, NO. 0

18. Diplock AT, Aggett PJ, Ashwell M, Bornet F, Fern, EB, Roberf-
roid M: Scientific concepts of functional foods in Europe: consen-
sus document. Br J Nutr 81:1–27, 1999.
19. European Opinion Research Group: “Health, Food and Alcohol
and Safety.” European Opinion Research Group, 2003. Special
Eurobarometer 186. http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/
ebs/ebs_186_en.pdf. Accessed December 9, 2016.
20. Gilbert L: The functional food trend: what is next and what Amer-
icans think about eggs. J Am Coll Nutr 19:507S–512S, 2000.
21. Gomez-Candela C, Roldan Puchalt MC, Palma Milla S, Lopez
Plaza B, Bermejo L: The role of omega-3 fatty acids in diets. J
Am Coll Nutr 34:42–47, 2015.
22. Gregori D, Ballali S, V€ogele C, Galasso F, Widhalm K, Berchialla
P, Baldi I: What is the value given by consumers to nutritional
label information? Results from a large investigation in Europe. J
Am Coll Nutr 34:120–125, 2015.
23. Grunert KG, L€ahteenm€aki L, Boztug Y, Martinsdottir E, Ueland

O, Astr€om A, Piritta Lampila: Perception of health claims among
Nordic consumers. J Consum Policy 32:269–287, 2009.
24. Hailu G, Boecker A, Henson S, Cranfield J: Consumer valuation
of functional foods and neutraceuticals in Canada. A conjoint
study using probiotics. Appetite 52:257–265, 2009.
25. Jebb SA: Dietary determinants of obesity. Obes Rev 8:93–97,
2007.
26. Jonas MS, Beckmann SC: “Functional Foods: Consumer Percep-
tions in Denmark and England.” Denmark: MAPP, Aarhus School
of Business, 1998. Working Paper 55.
27. Kraus A: Development of functional food with the participation of
the consumer. Motivators for consumption of functional products.
Int J Consum Stud 39:2–11, 2015.
28. Kraus A: Factors influencing the decisions to buy and consume
functional food. Br Food J 117:1622–1636, 2015.
29. Kraus A, Popek S: Structural model of fruit juice quality determin-
ing factors in product design and development. Br Food J
115:865–875, 2013.
30. Krystallis A, Maglaras G, Mamalis S: Motivations and cognitive
structures of consumers in their purchasing of functional foods.
Food Qual Prefer 19:525–538, 2008.
31. Laz TH, Rahman M, Berenson AB: Association of frequent use of
food labels with weight loss behaviors among low-income repro-
ductive-age women. J Am Coll Nutr 34:73–79, 2015.
32. Leathwood PD, Richardson DP, Str€ater P, Todd PM, van Trijp
HC: Consumer understanding of nutrition and health claims: sour-
ces of evidence. Br. J. Nutr 98:474–484, 2007.
33. McNamara RK: Mitigation of inflammation-induced mood dysre-
gulation by long-chain omega-3 fatty acids. J Am Coll Nutr
34:48–55, 2015.
34. Morris D, McCarthy M, O’Reilly S: “Customer Perceptions of
Calcium Enriched Range Juice.” Cork: Department of Food Eco-
nomics, National University of Ireland, 2004. Agribusiness Dis-
cussion Paper 42.
35. Nayga RMJ, Capps OJ: US consumers’ perceptions of the impor-
tance of following the US dietary guidelines. Food Policy 24:553–
564, 1999.
JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF NUTRITION
Functional Food
36. Niva M, M€akel€a J: Finns and functional foods: socio-demo-
graphics, health efforts, notions of technology and the acceptabil-
ity of health-promoting foods. Int J Consum Stud 31:34–45, 2007.
37. Olmedilla-Alonso B, Granado-Lorencio F, Herrero-Barbudo C,
Blanco-Navarro I: Nutritional approach for designing meat-based
functional food products with nuts. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr
46:537–542, 2006.
38. Pounis GD, Makri S, Gougias L, Makris H, Papakonstantinou M,
Panagiotakos DB, Kapsokefalou M: Consumer perception and use
of iron fortified foods is associated with their knowledge and under-
standing of nutritional issues. Food Qual Prefer 22:683–689, 2011.
39. Rokeach M: “The Nature of Human Values.” New York: The Free
Press, 1973.
40. Roos E: “Social Patterning of Food Behaviour Among Finnish
Men and Women.” Helsinki, Finland: National Public Health
Institute, 1998. Publications A6/1998.
41. Siro I, Kapolna E, Kapolna B, Lugasi A: Functional food. Product
development, marketing and consumer acceptance—a review.
Appetite 51:456–467, 2008.
42. Sarkar S: Potential of probiotics as pharmaceutical agent: a
review. Br Food J 115:1658–1687, 2013.
43. Sorenson D, Bogue J: A conjoint-based approach to concept opti-
mization: probiotics beverages. Br Food J 107:870–883, 2005.
44. Sundararajan K, Campbell MK, Choi, YH, Sarma S: The relation-
ship between diet quality and adult obesity: evidence from Can-
ada. J Am Coll Nutr 33:1–17, 2014.
45. Teratanavat R, Hooker NH: Consumer valuations and preference het-
erogeneity for a novel functional food. J Food Sci 71:533–541, 2006.
46. Urala N: “Functional Foods in Finland: Consumers’ Views, Atti-
tudes and Willingness to Use.” Finland: VTT Publications, 2005.
47. Urala N, L€ahteenm€aki L: Attitudes behind consumers’ willingness
to use functional foods. Food Qual Prefer 15:793–803, 2004.
48. van Kleef E, van Trijp HCM, Luning P, Jongen WMF: Consumer-
oriented functional food development: how well do functional dis-
ciplines reflect the “voice of the consumer”? Trends Food Sci
Technol 13(3):93–101, 2002.
49. van Kleef E, van Trijp HCM, Luning P: Functional foods: health
claim–food product compatibility and the impact of health claim
framing on consumer evaluation. Appetite 44:299–308, 2005.
50. van Kleef E, van Trijp HCM, Luning P: Consumer research in the
early stages of new product development: a critical review of
methods and techniques. Food Qual Prefer 16:181–198, 2005.
51. van Trijp, HCM, van der Lans IA: Consumer perceptions of nutri-
tion and health claims. Appetite 48:305–324, 2007.
52. Verbeke W: Consumer acceptance of functional foods: socio-
demographic, cognitive and attitudinal determinants. Food Qual
Prefer 16:45–57, 2005.
53. Verbeke W: Functional foods: consumer willingness to compro-
mise on taste for health? Food Qual Prefer 17:126–131, 2006.
54. Weststrate JA, van Poppel G, Verschuren PM: Functional
foods, trends and future. Br J Nutr 88(Suppl 2):S233–S235,
2002.
Received January 24, 2016; accepted August 22, 2016.
11