See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/353563313

The Cultural Food Dynamic in Ireland

Article · July 2021

DOI: 10.18775/jibrm.1849-8558.2015.65.3003

CITATIONS READS

0 199

1 author:

Roy Nelson
Queen's University Belfast
14 PUBLICATIONS 164 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Decision making models View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Roy Nelson on 23 November 2021.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Journal of International Business Research and
Marketing
Volume 6, Issue 5, 2021
journal homepage: www.researchleap.com

The Cultural Food Dynamic in Ireland

Roy Nelson
CAFRE, Loughry Campus, Cookstown, County Tyrone, Northern Ireland
FH [email protected]

ABSTRACT
Decision making with regards to food choice can be traditionally viewed as an economic
transaction, whereby consumers make a choice of which foods they would like to purchase
and consume within the framework of how much disposable income they have at any particular
time. However, within this framework, research has shown that there is a balance that consumers
aim to achieve between the hedonistic qualities of the food and the perceived effects it may have
on their health. Consequently, one area that is of significant importance is the concept of how food
risks are perceived and how this perception affects the decision- making process. Research has
indicated that Irish food consumers use a set of heuristic decision-making tools in order to assist
them in making food choices for themselves and their families. These decision-making tools are
evoked irrespective of age, gender or social class. This has led to concern (despite numerous health
promotion and media campaigns) regarding the national food diet, with imperfections in
consumption observed in an increase in obesity, nutritional imbalances and chronic ill health
which expose individuals to medical conditions such as cancer and heart disease. The increase
risks associated with these are prevalent in Ireland and for many measures Irish consumers rank
poorly with other countries in Europe. Although the food choices are predicated by these decision-
making tools there are reflections of previous historical dietary choices that persist within the diets
pursued today by themajority of Irish consumers. This in addition to the effects of acculturation
following recent changes in the demographic structure and the growth global networks for
information flow and exchange has resulted in a dynamic food environment with “nutrition
2016 Research Leap/Inovatus Services Ltd. echoes” observedin the choices people make.
All rights reserved.

DOI: 10.18775/jibrm.1849-8558.2015.65.3003
URL: https://doi.org/10.18775/jibrm.1849-
8558.2015.65.3003

Keywords:

Diet, Food Culture, Risk Perception

1. Introduction
Food consumption patterns are affected by a host of social,
psychological, sensory, and economic factors, and a number of instances such models relate dietary behaviour to nutrient
theoretical models have been proposed to classify and intake. However, with the impact of issues related to health and
understand these processes. Such models tend to relate dietary wellbeing, food is no longer seen as a means to satisfy a
behaviour to environmental and economic factors and in many particular nutrient requirement (e.g., energy intake or protein
requirement) but may be viewed as a contributor to overall
health by some. The concept of risk associated with foods

17
 Journal of International Business Research and Marketing

have also become commonplace with some foods described as or high density lipoproteins in the diet, that may not be visible
“unhealthy” and may be detrimental to health whereas others as an immediate concern but are ongoing worries for health
are seen to promote well being and even connote a health
promotion agencies.
outcome, and have been described as healthy or even “super
foods”. In addition, other issues regarding how the food is
produced (e.g., GM foods), processed (e.g., use of additives) To assist the consumer there have been a number of health
and pathogenic potential (e.g., bacteria such as e-coli or interventions aimed at promoting good dietary health from
campylobacter) have also entered the mindset of the general improved curricula in schools, wider media coverage of the
public and impinge upon the issue. Although the latter do affect main issues to labelling of foods giving broad level warnings to
behaviour especially when highlighted by the media, it is the the consumer in the form of traffic warning lights. However,
long term effect of poor diet that is of primary concern many health professionals are critical of that approach and
currently.
would wish consumers to think of the diet holistically as either
contributing to health and wellbeing or not. From this
2. Dietary Advice
perspective a number of models have been designed to
The outcomes associated with poor diet generally fall into two
represent the features of a balanced diet all of which have the
categories – those that may lead to overweight and obese
following common features, i.e., the best diet is one that is
conditions, and those, which are more chronic in nature and are
based on carbohydrates (breads, potatoes and other cereals) and
related to nutritional disorders (Eurodiet Project Steering
is rich in fruit and vegetables. It should also include moderate
Committee, 2001). The former has received the most attention
amounts of milk and dairy products, meat, fish or meat/milk
as the incidence of obesity levels in the population as a whole
alternatives, and limited amounts of food containing fat and
has risen significantly in the past two decades (Childhood
sugar (Beauchamp and Moran, 1984; Hunt, Strong and Poulter,
obesity, 2003; Campbell, 2004; Lowell, 2004), and is projected
2004; Teobald, 2004).
to rise to 50% of the population by 2030 with 25% of under 16
year olds also affected.
3. The Food Consumer Environment
Consumer behaviour relates to a process where individuals are
Currently it is estimated that in the UK 16% of 10 year olds are
involved in the complete act of purchasing and consumption of
overweight and/or obese (Lowell, 2004). On the island of
products (Summers, Gardiner, Lamb and McDaniel, 2003).
Ireland, these figures are thought to be higher with current
reports indicating that a third of boys and a quarter of girls are
With respect to food, this includes their selection, purchase,
carrying excess weight (Childhood obesity – a weighty issue for
preparation, consumption, and disposal. Traditionally the main
Northern Ireland, 2003b). For example, school-aged children in
criteria considered during this act have been a combination of
Northern Ireland have been shown to have one of the highest
prices, incomes, taste, and social attitudes, with price
consumption rates of chips, crisps, sweets, and chocolate in
Europe, particularly among 11 to 13 year olds (Vereecken and recognised as a key determinant (Ellis and Uncles, 1991;
Maes, 2000). It has been observed that dietary behaviours Gafton and Ness, 1991; Slattery, 1986; Wheelock, 1986;
developed during childhood are proven to be replicated later in Woodward, 1988). Although the purchase of food is seen by
life (Birch, Savage and Ventura, 2007), which has implications many as an economic transaction, and income may be important
for health and wellbeing of the future adult population. as a final determinant (lower income families will spend less on
food but with a greater percentage of their income (Shepherd et
The risks associated with obesity have been related to a number al., 1996)), there are a number of non economic factors that
of health problems. These include type 2 diabetes, heart disease, affect consumer choice. These range from issues associated
joint problems, and cancer (Dietz, 1998; McPherson, with the wholesomeness of the food, where it may have been
Montgomery and Nichamen, 1995; Warwick, McIlveen and sourced, time available to prepare and eat, the family setting,
Strugnell, 1999). Although energy balance is central to weight and how safe it is to eat (Elaine, 1999; Kohls and Uhl, 2002;
loss or gain, the consumption of energy dense foods (those high Koster, 2009).
in fat and sugar) are seen as a major contributing factor. This is
especially so in situations where there is a reduction of energy The interrelationships between these factors and their effect on
expenditure as a result of changes in leisure activities behaviour are regularly described in the form of consumer
(Anderson et al., 1999; Department of Health and Human models (Solomon, Bamossy, Ashegaard and Hogg, 2010).
Services, 1996; Prentice and Jebb, 1995). Excess energy These models can be simple input/output models reflective of
consumed, which leads to accumulation of fat, is a major worry the market place where the demand for products is seen as a
especially if it is deposited around the waistline (Chan, Rimm relationship between the demand for food as a means to satisfy
and Colditz, 1994; Colditz, Willeff, Rotnitzky and Mamson, a need in the consumer (hunger, desire, social status, etc.) and
1995). This situation may be compounded when decisions how this is subsequently reflected in the final purchase.
regarding food selection are made by parents which is an However, some researchers have developed more elaborate
example of a form of surrogate decision making. Nutritional models that take into account all the variables related to the act
disorders that are also prevalent relate to levels of, for example of purchase and consumption including characteristics of the
iron, fibre, low individuals and the social setting.

18
Various models that have been used to describe the behaviour consumer process - from initial purchase through to final
of consumers the most complete of which are the consumption but is primarily associated with either limited or
comprehensive models, as described by Spooncer (1989) and extended problem solving.
Bareham (1995), and the descriptive models of Kotler (1988).
These are multi-attribute models and they acknowledge that 4. Decision Making
there are many types of factors which come together to All goods have intrinsic properties and it is these properties or
influence the consumers’ decision to perform a particular attributes from which utility is derived, and this is the same
concept for any food that may be purchased (Lancaster, 1991).
behaviour, or not to perform it, as the case may be. Examples
Each food can be viewed as having a bundle of different
of other comprehensive or descriptive models include those attributes that are bound together and must therefore be
devised by Howard and Sheth (1969), Wierenga (1980), considered simultaneously when a choice decision is being
Hanneman (1984), Engel, Blackwell, and Miniard (1990), made. For the consumer it is difficult to consider all of attributes
Worsfold and Griffith (1995) and Steenkamp (1997). These at the one time and generally only some play a significant role
models tend to highlight the conflicting situation that many in practical decision-making. In addition the attributes
consumers find themselves in when making decisions regarding associated with a specific food may often represent conflicting
values, and in order to deal with these conflicts, people simplify
the selection and ultimate use of the food products.
the process through the use of different strategies. These
strategies are the rules that people develop over a period of time
However, for many food items the decisions regarding selection for how and what they choose in recurring situations. They
and use are generally made very rapidly and with little thought simplify food choice by eliminating the cognitive effort and
as they are perceived to be low involvement items (Beharrell time required for deliberation about every choice situation and
and Denison, 1995). Under these conditions the consumer is a number of distinct strategies can be observed in individuals.
said to be completing a routine purchase (Meyer, 1988). For These are summarised in Table 1.
other items there may be more involvement and the consumer
The decision-making strategy that is chosen is dependent upon
may then weigh up a small number of attributes in order to make context and emerges from initial conscious food choice
the decision (e.g., concerns related to calorie, fat or salt levels). decisions for a specific situation and eventually become less
In this case the consumer is said to be involved in limited mindful when that situation occurs repeatedly (Sobal, Bisogni,
problem solving (Sheth, 2011). However, when the consumer Devine and Jastran, 2006). However, one factor that has
takes on board all the available attributes including marketing emerged in recent years as a major contributor affecting the
cues and other people’s requirements (e.g., the family or consumer’s decision making is the concept of the risks
associated with the production, processing, preparation, and
children) then the consumer is involved in extended problem
ultimate consumption of food (Nelson, 2004).
solving. This is rare in the case of food items unless there is a
critical incident that is uppermost in the persons mind. This can Table 1: Summary of the decision making strategies when
occur during incidents such as “food scares”, or with demands making food choice decision.
for a change in diet, or through personal experience, where the
‘incident’ is now a major determinant and “drives” the
consumer from making either routine or limited purchase
decisions to the more complex extended problem solving
scenario (Sheth, 2011).

In addition to this people get “bored” with the everyday

decisions of selecting and consuming the same range of
products and will at times enter a situation of seeking out new
information

in order to change the product range and introduce variety into

the diet (Venkatsan, 1973). Other drivers in this increased
desire for variety may be changes in family circumstances,
children requests, influences from TV and holiday experiences
(Dammann and Smith, 2009; Lawrence and Barker, 2009; 5. Risk
Thomson, Spence, Raine and Laing, 2008). When consumers It seems that the behaviour of consumers seem to violate the
enter a routine problem solving mode they are said to be rules of commonsense rationality. To try and understand this
phenomena research has been carried out regarding how food
involved in the psychology of simplification, whereas when
risks may be perceived by the consumer and how these may
they are engaged in limited or extended problem solving they affect the decisions made. When investigating perception two
are said to be involved in the psychology of complication broad approaches can be followed. In most cases, perception is
(Howard and Sheth, 1969). This creates a natural rhythm to thought of as a physiological process whereby the brain
food purchasing with periods when the consumer is either interprets mainly visual stimuli into recognisable forms or
consuming a restricted range of foods or expanding their shapes. However, when applied to the area of decision making
choices and trying out new foods. However, in order to achieve perception is better viewed as the complete act of seeing and is
not just concerned with the biochemical interpretations in the
the optimum solution the consumer will use a specific decision
brain but how the stimuli are integrated into the complete act of
making strategy which may be applied at various stages of the
19
perception, and integrate previous experiences and attitudes and such perceptions as regards safety are obviously unrealistic, the
knowledge the individual may have. Classically the perception risk looks very small from the perspective of the individual.
of risk is based upon a set of general rules known as the risk Both the public and the experts are prone to overconfidence.
heuristics. These are evoked when one does not have the full
statistical evidence on hand to evaluate risks, which is generally (3) Desire for Certainty
the case with respect to food. Consequently people rely on what Peoples desire to reduce anxiety caused by potential risks is
they remember hearing or observing about the risk in question commonly illustrated by denial. Denial is exhibited by people
and the heuristics help to reduce difficult mental tasks to when faced with hazards but who view their world as either safe
simpler ones. These heuristics may be valid in some or predictable enough to preclude worry. This is analogous to
circumstances, but in others may lead to large biases, which the concept of “selective attention to evidence” and the
subsequently affect risk assessment (Lichenstein, Slovic, resulting bias has been noted in having an effect in making
Fischhoff, Layman and Combes, 1978). The heuristics are: judgements under conditions of uncertainty. These include a
tendency to ignore or discount negative and disconfirming
(1) Availability evidence (Lord, Lepper and Ross, 1979; Nisbett and Ross,
People use this to judge an event as likely or frequent if 1980). This confirmation bias extends not only to selective
instances of it are easy to imagine or recall. Frequently attention, but also to selective information seeking, discounting,
occurring events are generally easier to imagine and recall than interpretation and testing.
rare events. However, availability may be affected by numerous
factors unrelated to frequency of occurrence, such as the (4) It Won’t Happen To Me
coverage given to recent disasters or details provided in Overconfidence can also be observed in that people tend to
television documentaries. Media coverage tends to concentrate consider themselves personally immune to many hazards whose
on the spectacular at the expense of the common with the result societal risks they would readily acknowledge. This can be
that events which have a low frequency of occurrence may expressed in the theory of “optimistic bias” (Weinstein, 1989),
receive more “air” time than common occurrences. Applied to where individuals appear to have a decreased subjective
food risks, this would suggest people would underestimate, for probability of the occurrence of negative events, but an
example, the risk of certain dietary cancers, but overestimate increased subjective probability for positive events. McKenna
the risk of botulism and this can seriously distort risk judgement (1993) explains this bias as a need to control situations, such
(Furby, 1973). that the perceived control reduces the subjective probability of
personal risk associated with the hazard in question.
The role of availability therefore indicates how people estimate
how “representative” information to be. This then leads to Consumers therefore have to process a lot of information, and
errors in the use of the evidence, in that people: compare it with many cues and biases they may or may not
a) ignore evidence about base rates in favour of have. Information related to this risk is treated with scepticism
secondary evidence (Smithson, 1989; Tversky and Kaheneman, if it does not tally with the persons own perception of risk. This
1974) and consequently anticipate signals in randomly means that people are very selective in what they believe in, and
generated data (O’Leary, Coplin, Shapiro and Dean, 1974); will take on board only, in most situations, what suits their
b) become overconfident in the evidence presented due biases (Fischhoff, Bostrom and Quadrel, 2002).
to the illusion of validity (Tversky and Kanheneman, 1974);
c) are insufficiently sensitive to the fragility of The concept of risk is important for understanding how
assumptions or the problems of small sample sizes (Fischhoff, consumers make choices (Grewal, Gotlieb and Marmorstien,
Lichenstein, Slovic, Derby and Keeney, 1981; Tversky and 1994; Mitchell, 1999) and food products have been a consistent
Kahneman, 1971); feature of perceived risk studies over the years and a study into
d) view chance events as self-corrective (Mathews and the risk management behaviour of the Northern Ireland food
Hunt, 1985); consumer (Nelson, 2004) revealed how the risks were
e) make conscious decisions to simplify analysis by considered. This study identified that the consumer allocates all
excluding low-probability events from consideration the risks associated with food (from production, processing
(Fredenburg, 1988). through to consumption) into two identifiable groups in order
to simplify the decision making processing. Group 1 relates to
Most people as a result, find it difficult to understand “low” the risks associated with the processing of the food. These were
risks. They tend to ignore some risks entirely (e.g., cholesterol thought of as “extrinsic” risks i.e., the risk had been added to
in the diet) or are very apprehensive even when scientific the food in some way or other by a third party and related to
estimates show a low risk (e.g., pesticides, BSE) (Fisher, processing and production and related referred mainly to food
McClelland and Schulze, 1989), and are very likely to pathogens and contaminants. Group 2 risks where those risks
overestimate the risks of dramatic causes of death (Lichenstein associated with the product itself. These were thought of as
et al., 1978). “intrinsic” risks and related to the nutritional content of the
food, mainly salt, sugar, and fat. However, the perception of the
(2) Overconfidence risk (whether in group 1 or 2) was based upon three
People are typically very confident in the judgements made by characteristics of the risk itself – the fear the risk evoked in the
themselves to the extent that people believe that they can exert individual, how involved the person was in the risk “decision”
control over events (Ross and Fletcher, 1985; Strickland, and finally how new the risk was. Although the fear component
Lewicki and Katz, 1966). This overconfidence is a trait or was instrumental in terms of reacting to new information,
tendency in people when judging events that have uncertain involvement was seen as key to managing the risk. As the fear
outcomes (Fishhoff and Slovic, 1980). The psychological basis component rose (in any risk scenario), but if the consumer was
for this unwarranted certainty seems to be peoples insensitivity involved more in the decision making process and was provided
to the tenuousness of the assumptions upon which their with timely and relevant information, the risk could be
judgements are based and the tendency to be optimistic about controlled. Crucially this related to information regarding
judgements of their own behaviour (Douglas, 1985). Although

20
coping mechanisms related to how to deal with the risk in The food culture in Ireland has changed dramatically in recent
question. years following the growth of the large multinational
supermarkets after their entrance to the country in the 1990’s.
One other factor also played a role in the effect the perceived This has led to an increasing availability of food, both raw and
risk had on the decision making process – that of prior processed, to the consumer. It was widely recognised that the
experience. The effect of this was observed to be akin to the dietary habits in the country were changing, but with a reliance
process of inoculation (Nelson, 2002), in that the initial on more traditional foods and means of preparation and eating
encounter sensitised the individual to future risks, and if the risk centred on the potato.
was encountered again then a severe change in behaviour was
observed. Crucially this was observed across all food categories Specific potato dishes include potato-based dishes such as
and was not confined to the food product to which the risk was “champ”, “pasties”, “boxty”, and the ultimate collaboration
initially related. For example, a risk observed with beef would between potato and bread – “potato bread farl”. Further
also affect how the consumer searched for information and traditional Irish recipes promoted featuring potatoes include
made decisions related to the purchase of other red meats such Irish stew and “colcannon”. It is not only the presence of
as lamb or pork. Again active communication regarding the potatoes that are thought of as a feature of the diet but how they
management of the risk was seen as an important tool to help are eaten - either fried, roast, baked and simply boiled in their
reduce this “reaction”. “jackets” to be peeled ceremoniously at the table. However, this
scene, idyllic though it may be, has changed.
It is, however, recognised that consumers consider not only the
risks associated with a particular product when making a Culture can be viewed as a dynamic process liable to change
judgement but that perception of benefits also plays a part where people learn to make adjustments to their norms and
(Conner, Povey, Sparks, James and Shepherd, 1998). Based on values as a result of contact with other groups of people
this, a number of studies have been conducted, which examine exhibiting a different culture, through a sharing and transfer of
consumer perceptions of both risks and benefits associated with common experiences and knowledge, a process known as
various foods or food hazards. Studies that have examined both acculturation (Lee, Sobal and Frongillo, 1999; Wenkan and
risk and benefit perception suggest that risk and benefit Wolff, 1970). The acculturation process can occur at both an
perceptions are considered as separate entities, when it comes individual or group level and may continue for years and will
to making judgments. This is consistent with analytical in all likelihood vary in pace and levels. The acculturation
approaches to decision- making, which often treat the process is highly influenced by the individual as some may
perception of risks and benefits as two distinct concepts, which choose to lose their original cultural identity while others may
are then considered separately and weighed against each other choose to integrate elements of the new culture into their
when making a choice. original culture.

Alternatively, the perceived risks and benefits can be viewed as A multidimensional model developed by Keele and Padilla
inversely related, resulting in the two concepts being considered (1987) holds that an individual’s level and speed of
together when making a product choice. In essence, when acculturation will depend on the individual’s level of cultural
consumers are selecting foods to prepare and consume they are loyalty and knowledge. The individual who shows more loyalty
weighing up the benefits of the food – taste, nutritional value and more knowledge of their heritage culture, than they do of
(positive), convenience against the risks associated with the the incoming culture, will be less acculturated than the
food and or preparation – nutritional value (negative), possible individual who possesses more knowledge of the host culture.
additives and contaminants etc. In a study on the risk benefit Some may require little change, for others change may be
analysis of three commonly consumed products (beef burgers, fundamental and if motivation is low or nonexistent,
bread, and milk) carried out in 2007 identified that once the acculturation will be minimal.
level of risk had been identified then different decision making
strategies were employed. If the overall view of a product was Food habits and traditions are the foundations of our food
that it was of high risk then the consumer was more like to culture and there is no cultural group for whom traditional foods
employ a face trade- off strategy when making a judgment. are not an important symbol of their culture inheritance and
Conversely if the overall view of the product was that it was their ethnic identity. While we cannot choose our ethnic
less risky, then a more relaxed decision-making strategy was identity, we can change it. As we encounter and observe new
used (Windrum, 2007). cultures we may imitate and adapt their trends, behaviours and
customs that in turn will result in changes in our food choice
One further effect that has been observed that affects food and our food habits.
choice behaviour is the changing cultural landscape in which
the choice decisions are made. With growing interdependence between countries, and cheaper
more accessible means of transportation over the past ten years
6. The Changing Cultural Landscape the United Kingdom, including Ireland, has witnessed a
Society can be identified and characterised by many factors dramatic change in the movement of its population. This has
such as language, religion, customs, values and beliefs, and included the growth of people holidaying in other countries on
these all form part of our culture. An outcome of this is that our more than one occasion in the year to the recent movement of
behaviour may be seen as a way of distinguishing an individual people from other countries (mainly EU citizens) in search of
of one group from individuals of another group (Hofstede, employment. For decades emigration exceeded immigration in
1984). Ones food culture is more specific, and may be described Ireland, but this position slowly started to change in the late
as a combination of tastes, cuisines, and practices which are 1990’s and early 2000’s when Northern Ireland and the United
reflected as dietary habits and as such make an important Kingdom started to become major recipients of international
contribution to our food decisions. It is now recognised that our labour migrants.
food habits change as we adapt to travel,
immigration/migration, and the socio- economic environment.

21
The Ireland economy as a whole has benefited from the inward convenient the food may be e.g., fast food outlets with the
migration of labour from countries such as Portugal and Poland, availability of burgers etc as well as the influence of recently
and migrants into Ireland have made a significant contribution migrated people to the area.
to filling the labour forces gaps in food processing, agriculture,
healthcare, hospitality, and catering sectors. As people These changes are widespread and are especially visible in
constantly move to other countries, cultures become more adolescents and young adults, but have also been observed at
integrated and as a result consumer needs become more other levels within society including the elderly. The changes
sophisticated (Sharma, Cade and Cruickshank, 1999). also reflect upon the dynamic nature of the food culture in
Ireland and the rapid movement of tastes and desires more
However, it is not just the inward migration of people that may indicative of a modern consumer. However, echoes from the
affect the food eating behaviours but also the media coverage past reflecting a more traditional Northern Irish food culture can
of diverse food health issues and the regular advertising of still be seen today (Walsh and Nelson, 2012). Traditional bread
foods. Food producers and processors (representing global products are widely consumed, potatoes are a regular feature on
concerns) invest considerable amounts on advertising and most people’s weekly fare, and the practice of eating together
packaging to capture the interests of the consumer. The growth at set times still occurs.
of the larger food retailers along with the food service sector,
with their extended supply chains have delivered a vast array Figure 1 summarises the main factors affecting food choice
and choice of foods to be considered by the consumer on a daily emerging from this review. It envisages a consumer balancing
basis. Food advertising is also a noted source regarding the competing demands of the benefits associated with the food
information associated with aspects of convenience and and the risks that may be inherent in the consumption of the
availability and in one particular example advertising directed food in question. In order to arrive at a satisfactory conclusion
at adolescents is seen to focus on fast foods which are generally the consumer uses an appropriate decision making strategy that
high in calories. weighs these twin issues. The perception of the risks and
benefits are affected by their perceptual framework employed
This was reinforced by the British Medical Association, which at that moment in time. For example, if a food risk issue has
has made several recommendations including a ban on the been highlighted in the media and is brought to the attention of
advertising of unhealthy foods for children, the encouragement the consumer then the perceived benefits of choosing that food
of price promotions on healthy foods instead of would have to be considerably enhanced for the choice to be
sweets/chocolates etc, and clear nutritional labelling and made. The reverse would happen if the food product was
healthy advertising in schools. The influence of the TV chef perceived as beneficial to the consumer a decision could be
preparing and cooking specific menu choices can also be seen made whereby the risk is deemed acceptable.
to effect demand for a

particular food. This television format is a popular programme

that can be viewed most evenings and is usually followed with
the publication of the relevant book that again is bought widely
by the general public.

Up until the mid 1990’s there was relatively little change in the
food culture. What was consumed was primarily based on
ingredients and foods from the home market and the UK, with
a tendency towards plain, well cooked, meat, potato and
vegetable meals, with few frills and sauces. However this has
now changed and the Northern Ireland consumer is more likely
to sample new foods, which have resulted in changes to the
traditional meat and potatoes diet and a much more varied diet.

7. A Model of Food Consumption

The Northern Ireland consumer, when making a choice of what Figure 1: Summary of the influencing factors affecting food
to eat at any particular time is dealing with a large number of choice in Ireland
competing issues in order to make the final decision. Two main However, there is an overarching framework in which the
themes have emerged in recent years that have affected this decisions are made and that is the interchange between the
process. The first is the ongoing concern regarding the risk driving forces of the cultural change process against the advice
associated with eating food. Although in the past this has provided from the health promotion agencies. On the one hand
highlighted issues associated with how the food is produced or there is the move towards the consumption of more convenient
processed in the form of contaminants, the concerns now are foods that are in many instances high in fat and/or sugar against
more related to the nutritional risks of the food. These are the pressure exerted by the ongoing message of healthy and safe
constantly being weighed against issues associated with the eating. The achievement of a healthy and balanced diet relies
obvious benefits of the food in terms of its taste and the feeling on the compromise between these two competing forces. One
of being satiated after consumption. moderating aspect of this interplay has been the influence from
the food cultural heritage. There still remain vestiges of the past
The second theme is the continued change in the culture of emerging in dietary behaviours. These can be described as
eating brought about by ever closer contacts with practices from cultural echoes in the sense that their origins may not be known
outside of the island. These pressures for change could be in the but can still be “heard” and observed by others.
form of new food products being considered e.g., dishes from
other countries but also includes influences related to how

22
These echoes not only influence the foods chosen but how they Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior,
may be purchased, prepared in the home and with whom they 41(4), 242–253.
are eaten. For example in a recent study of the nutritional eating 15) Department of Health and Human Services (PHS).
habits of pregnant mothers in Northern Ireland, it was identified (1996). Physical activity and health: A report of the
that those mothers who relied on a more traditional eating Surgeon General (Executive Summary). Pittsburg
pattern did have a healthier food intake with a better balance (PA): Superintendent of Documents.
diet (Coyle and Nelson, 2011). This was a strategy employed 16) Dietz, W. H. (1998). Health consequences of
specifically by those with lower levels of nutritional knowledge obesity in youth: childhood predictors of adult
than their peers. It is perhaps these echoes that need to be disease. Pediatrics, 101(3), 518–525.
investigated further as they may be the key to reversing the 17) Douglas, M. (1985). Risk acceptability according
trend of obesity and related health issues in Ireland. to the social sciences. Padstow; Cornwall (UK): T.
J. Press (Padstow).
8. Bibliography 18) Elaine, H. (1999). Factors affecting food decisions
made by individual consumers. Food Policy,
1) Anderson, R. E. et al. (1999). Effects of lifestyle 24(2/3), 287–294.
activity v.s. structured aerobic exercise in obese 19) Ellis, K. and Uncles, M. D. (1991). How private
women. Journal of American Medical Association, labels affect consumer choice. British Food
281(4), 335–340. Crossref Journal, 93(9), 41–49.
2) Baharrell, B. and Denison, T. J. (1995). 20) Engel, J. F., Blackwell, R. D. and Miniard, P. W.
Involvement in a routine food shopping context. (1990). Consumer behavior (6th ed.). London
Crossref (UK): The Dryden Press International Edition.
3) British Food Journal, 97(4), 24–29. 21) Eurodiet Project Steering Committee. (2001).
Eurodiet core report. Nutrition and diet for healthy
4) Bareham, J. (1995). Consumer behaviour in the lifestyles in Europe. Public Health Nutrition,
food industry: An European perspective. Oxford 4(2A), 256–273. Crossref
(UK): Butterworth-Heineman. 22) Fischhoff, B. and Slovic, P. (1980). A little
5) Beauchamp, G. K. and Moran, M. (1984). learning ... confidence in multicue judgement
Acceptance of sweet taste preference in human tasks. In R. Nickerson (ed.), Attention and
infants. Appetite, 3, 139–152. Crossref performance VIII (pp. 779–801). Hillsdale (NJ):
6) Birch, L., Savage, J. and Ventura, A. (2007). Erlbaum.
Influences on the development of children’s eating 23) Fischhoff, B., Bostrom, A. and Quadrel, M. J.
behaviours: from infancy to adolescence. Canadian (2002). Risk perception and communication. In R.
Journal of Dietetic Practice and Research, 68(1), Detels, S. McEwan, R. Beaglehole and H. Tanaka
S1–S56. (eds.), Oxford
7) Campbell, I. W. (2004). Obesity in children - facts
and fallacies. European Journal of Lipid Science 24) textbook of public health (4th ed.) (pp. 1105–
and Technology, 106(5), 334–339. Crossref 1123). Oxford (UK): Oxford University Press.
8) Chan, J. M., Rimm, E. B. and Colditz, G. A. 25) Fischhoff, B., Lichtenstein, S., Slovic, P., Derby, S.
(1994). Obesity, fat distribution and weight gain as and Keeney, R. (1981). Acceptable risk.
risk factors for clinical diabetes in men. Diabetes Cambridge (UK): Cambridge University Press.
Care, 17(9), 961–969. Crossref 26) Fisher, A., McClelland, G. H. and Schulze, W. D.
9) Childhood obesity – a weighty issue for Northern (1989). Strategies for explaining very small risks in
Ireland. (2003). Belfast: Health Promotion Agency a community context. Journal of the American
Press. Pollution Control Association, 39, 271–276.
10) Childhood obesity (Postnote report). (2003). 27) Food Standards Agency. (2001). The balance of
London: Parliamentary Office of Science and good health. London (UK): Food Standards
Technology Millbank. Agency.
11) Colditz, G. A., Willeff, W. C., Rotnitzky, A. and 28) Freudenburg, W. R. (1988). Perceived risk, real
Mamson, J. E. (1995). Weight gain as a risk factor risk: Social science and the art of probabilistic risk
for clinical mellitus in women. Annuals of Internal assessment. Science, 242(4875), 44–49. Crossref
Medicine, 122(7), 481– 486. Crossref 29) Furby, L. (1973). Interpreting regression towards
12) Conner, M., Povey, R., Sparks, P., James, R. and the mean in developmental research.
Shepherd, R. (1998). Understanding dietary choice 30) Developmental Psychology, 8(2), 172–179.
and dietary change: contributions from social 31) Gafton, I. and Ness, M. (1991). Meaty horrors and
psychology. In A. Murcott (ed.), The nation’s diet poisoned delights. Times Higher Education
- the social science of food choice (pp. 43–56). Supplement, 8, 16.
London (UK): Longman. 32) Grewal, D., Gotlieb, J. and Marmorstein, H.
13) Coyle, R. and Nelson, R. (2011). Can a consumer’s (1994). The moderating effects of message framing
food nutrition knowledge influence their food and source credibility on the price-perceived risk
purchasing behaviour? A knowledge identity. relationship. Journal of Consumer Research, 21(1),
Queens University, Belfast presented at a Research 145–153.
Seminar (21st June 2011) in Loughry Campus, 33) Hanemann, M. (1984). Discrete/continuous models
Cookstown, Northern Ireland. of consumer demand. Econometrica, 52(3), 541–
14) Dammann, K. W. and Smith, C. (2009). Factors 561. Crossref
affecting low-income women’s food choices and 34) Hofstede, G. (1984). Culture’s consequences:
the perceived impact of dietary intake and International differences in work-related values.
socioeconomic status on their health and weight. Newbury Park (CA): Sage.

23
 35) Howard, J. S. and Sheth, J. N. (1969). The theory 60) Nelson, R. (2002). Food safety: risk inoculation
of buyer behaviour. New York (NY): Wiley. and the perception of risk for individuals and
36) Hunt, P., Strong, M. and Poulter, J. (2004). society. In 32nd Annual Food Science &
Evaluating a new food selection guide. Technology Research Conference, University
37) Nutrition Bulletin, 29(1), 19–25. College Cork, 12th September, 2002.
38) Keele, F. and Padilla, A. (1987). Acculturation: 61) Nisbett, R. E. and Ross, L. (1980). Human
Theory, models, and some new findings. inference: Strategies and shortcoming of social
39) Boulder (CO): Westview Press. judgement. Englewood Cliffs (NJ): Prentice-Hall.
40) Kohls, R. L. and Uhl, J. N. (2002). Marketing of 62) O’Leary, M. K., Coplin, W. D., Shapiro, H. B. and
agricultural products. London (UK): Prentice-Hall Dean, D. (1974). The quest for relevance.
International. International Studies Quarterly, 18, 211–237.
41) Koster, E. P. (2009). Diversity in the determinants 63) Prentice, A. M. and Jebb, S. A. (1995). Obesity in
of food choice: a psychological perspective. Food Britain: gluttony or sloth. British Medical Journal,
Quality and Preference, 20(2), 70–82. Crossref 311(7002), 437–439. Crossref
42) Kotler, P. (1988). Marketing management: 64) Ross, M. and Fletcher, G. J. (1985). Attribution and
analysis, planning, implementation and control. social perception. In G. Lindzey and
New Jersey (NJ): Prentice Hall. 65) E. Aronson (eds.), The handbook of social
43) Lancaster, K. J. (1966). A new approach to psychology. Vol. II (3rd ed.) (pp. 73–122). New
consumer theory. Journal of Political Economy, York (NY): Random House.
74(2), 132–157. 66) Sharma, S., Cade, J. E. and Cruickshank, J. K.
44) Lancaster, K. J. (1991). Modern consumer theory. (1993). An initial assessment of food and nutrient
Brookfield (VT): Edward Elgar. intake to develop a food frequency questionnaire in
45) Lawrence, W. and Barker, M. (2009). Workshop an AfroCaribbean population sample. Proceedings
on changing nutrition behaviours to improve of the Nutrition Society, 52, 328A.
material and fetal health: a review of factors 67) Shepherd, R. et al. (1996). Constraints on dietary
affecting food choices of disadvantaged women. choice: the role of income. Nutrition and Food
Proceedings of ACE Nutrition Society, 68, 189– Science, 96(5), 19–21. Crossref
194. Crossref 68) Sheth, J. N. (2011). Models of buyer behaviour:
46) Lee, S. K., Sobal, J. and Frongillo, Jr, E. A. (1999). conceptual, quantitative and empirical.
Acculturation and dietary practices among Korean 69) Decatur (GA): Marketing Classics Press
Americans. Journal of the American Dietetic 70) Slattery, J. (1986). Current diet and health
Association, 99, 1084–1089. regulations: the response of the food industry. Food
47) Lichtenstein, S., Slovic, P., Fischhoff, B., Layman, Marketing, 2(3), 180–186.
M. and Combs, B. (1978). Judged frequency of 71) Smithson, M. (1989). Ignorance and uncertainty:
lethal events. Journal of Experimental Psychology: emerging paradigms. New York (NY): Springer.
Human Learning Memory, 4(6), 551–578. 72) Sobal, J., Bisogni, C. A., Devine, C. M. and Jastran,
Crossref M. (2006). A conceptual model of the food choice
48) Lord, C., Lepper, M. R. and Ross, L. (1979). process over the life course. In R. Shepherd and M.
Biased assimilation and attitude polarisation: the Raats (eds.), The psychology of food choice (pp.
effects of prior theories on subsequently 1–18). Wallingford (UK): CABI.
considered evidence. Journal of Personality and 73) Solomon, A. R., Bamossy, G., Ashegaard, S. and
Social Psychology, 37(11), 2098–2110. Hogg, M. K. (2000). Answer behaviors: a
consumer perspective. Edinburgh (UK): Pearson
49) Lowell, J. (2004). The food industry and it’s impact Education Limited.
upon increasing global obesity: a case study. 74) Spooncer, F. (1989). Behavioural studies for
British Food Journal, 106(3), 238–248. marketing and business. Cheltenham (UK):
50) Mathews, L. and Hunt, J. (1985). Role of temporal Stanley Thorpes.
contiguity in subjective prediction. 75) Steenkamp, J. B. E. M. (1997). Dynamics in
51) Psychological Reports, 57, 793–794. consumer behaviour with respect to agricultural
52) McKenna, F. P. (1993). It won’t happen to me: and food products. In B. Wierenga, A. van Tilburg,
unrealistic optimism or illusion of control. K. Grunert, J. B. E. M. Steenkamp and M. Wedel
53) British Journal of Psychology, 84(1), 39–50. (eds.), Agricultural marketing and consumer
54) McPherson, R. S., Montgomery, D. H. and behaviour in a changing world (pp. 143–188).
Nichamen M. Z. (1995). Nutritional status of Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
children: what do we know?. Journal of Nutrition
Education, 27(5), 225–234. 76) Strickland, L. H., Lewicki, R. J. and Katz, A. M.
55) Meyer, J. H. (1988). The learning of multi-attribute (1966). Temporal orientation and perceived control
judgement policies. Journal of Consumer as determinants of risk taking. Journal of
Research, 14(2), 155–173. Crossref Experimental Psychology, 2(2), 143–151. Crossref
56) Mitchell, V. W. (1999). Consumer perceived risk: 77) Summers, J., Gardiner, M., Lamb, C., Hair, J. and
conceptualisations and models. McDaniel, C. (2003). Essentials of marketing.
57) European Journal of Marketing, 33(1/2), 163–195. Victoria: Thomson.
58) Nelson R. (2004). Risk management behaviour by 78) Teobald, H. E. (2004). A whole diet approach to
the Northern Ireland food consumer. healthy eating. Nutrition Bulletin, 29, 44–49.
59) International Journal of Consumer Studies, 28(2), 79) Thomson, M., Spence, J. C., Raine, K. and Laing,
186–193. L. (2008). The association of television viewing

24
 with snacking behavior and bodyweight of young Ireland – influences and challenges. Nutritional
adults. Nutrition, 22, 329–335. Food Sciences, 99(5), 229–236. Crossref
80) Tversky, A. and Kahneman, D. (1971). The belief 89) Weinstein, N. D. (1989). Optimistic biases about
in the law of small numbers. Crossref personal risks. Science, 246(4935), 1232–1233.
81) Psychological Bulletin, 76, 105–110. 90) Wenkan, N. S. and Wolff, R. J. (1970). A half
82) Tversky, A. and Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgement century of changing food habits among Japanese in
under uncertainty: heuristics and biases. Science, Hawaii. Journal of the American Dietetic
185(4157), 1124–1131. Association, 57(1), 29–32.
83) Venkatson, M. (1973). Cognitive consistency and 91) Wheelock, J. V. (1986). Coping with change in the
novelty seeking. In S. Ward and T. S. Robertson food business. Food Marketing, 2(3), 20–45.
(eds.), Consumer behaviour: theoretical sources 92) Wierenga, B. (1980). Multidimensional models for
(pp. 355–384). Englewood Cliffs (NJ): Prentice- the analysis of consumers’ perceptions and
Hall. preferences with respect to agricultural and food
84) Vereecken, C. and Maes, L. (2000). Eating habits, products. Journal of Agricultural Economics,
dental care and dieting. In C. Currie, 31(1), 83–97. Crossref
85) K. Hurrelmann, W. Settertobulte, R. Smith and J. 93) Windrum, N. E., (2007). A risk benefit analysis of
Todd (eds.), Health and health behaviour among nutritional choice derived from Northern Ireland
young people. International Report from the food consumers (Doctoral dissertation). Belfast:
1997/98 HBSC survey. WHO Policy Series: Health [N. E. Windrum].
policy for children and adolescents. Copenhagen: 94) Woodward, J. (1988). Consumer attitudes to meat
World Health Organisation. and meat products. Bradford (UK): Horton
86) Walsh, A. and Nelson, R. (2012). Northern Ireland Publishing.
food culture: moving beyond spuds. 95) Worsfold, D. and Griffith, C. (1995). A generic
87) Gastronomy Symposium, Dublin, Ireland, June 6th model for evaluating consumer food safety
2012. behaviour. Journal of Food Control, 6(6), 357–363.
88) Warwick, J., McIlveen, H. and Strugnell, C. Crossref
(1999). Food choices of 9-17 year olds in Northern

25
View publication stats