Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-04T06:18:32.410Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Motivations for healthful dietary change

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2007

Jessie A Satia ,
Alan R Kristal ,
Susan Curry  and
Elyse Trudeau
Jessie A Satia*
Affiliation:
Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Cancer Prevention Research Program, 1100 Fairview Avenue North, MP-702, Seattle, WA 98109-1024, USA
Alan R Kristal
Affiliation:
Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Cancer Prevention Research Program, 1100 Fairview Avenue North, MP-702, Seattle, WA 98109-1024, USA
Susan Curry
Affiliation:
Center for Health Studies, 1100 Olive Way, Group Health Cooperative of Puget Sound, Seattle, WA 98101, USA
Elyse Trudeau
Affiliation:
Project Director, Mapi Values, 27 rue de la Villette, F-69003. Lyon, France
*
*Corresponding author: Email [email protected]
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Objective:

To describe scales that measure motivations for changing dietary behaviour, and to examine associations of these scales with current diet and dietary change.

Design:

A secondary analysis of a randomised trial of a self-help intervention to promote lower fat and higher fruit and vegetable consumption.

Participants and setting: Participants were 1205 adults selected at random from enrolees of a large Health Maintenance Organization. At baseline, data were collected on motives for changing diet, fruit and vegetable intake, fat-related dietary habits, and demographic characteristics. Participants were then randomised to receive the intervention or to receive no materials. A follow-up survey was administered at 12 months.

Results:

A majority of participants reported that it was very important to make dietary changes to feel better (72%) and to control an existing medical problem (57%), but very few (4%) were motivated by pressure from others. Factor analysis of the diet motivation items yielded two intrinsic (‘self-image’ and ‘personal health’) and one extrinsic (‘social pressure’) scales with fair internal consistency reliabilities (Cronbach's α = 0.59 to 0.68). Motivation scales were statistically significantly associated with demographic characteristics and baseline diet. For example, desire for a better self-image was a stronger motivator for changing diet among females, while personal health was more important to older persons and men (P < 0.001). Social pressure to change diet was statistically significantly associated with higher fat intake (r = 0.11) and self-image was associated with lower fat intake (r = −0.14, both P < 0.001). Motivation by social pressure and self-image were both significantly associated with greater fat reduction at 12 months post-intervention (P < 0.05).

Conclusions:

The intrinsic and extrinsic motivation scales were weakly associated with current diet and predicted response to dietary intervention. More research is needed to better characterise and measure motives for dietary change, and to test whether tailoring interventions based on individuals' motives for dietary change would improve intervention effectiveness.

Keywords

Intrinsic motivationsExtrinsic motivationsDietDietary changeNutrition interventions
Type
Research Article
Information
Public Health Nutrition , Volume 4 , Issue 5 , October 2001 , pp. 953 - 959
Copyright
Copyright © CABI Publishing 2001

References

1Pollard, TM, Steptoe, A, Wardle, J. Motives underlying healthy eating: using the food choice questionnaire to explain variation in dietary intake. J. Biosoc. Sci. 1998; 30: 165–79.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2Glanz, K, Patterson, RE, Kristal, AR, Feng, Z, Linnan, L, Heimendinger, J, Hebert, JR. Impact of work site health promotion on stages of dietary change: the Working Well Trial. Health Educ. Behav. 1998; 25: 448–63.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3Trudeau, E, Kristal, AR, Li, S, Patterson, RE. Demographic and psychosocial predictors of fruit and vegetable intakes differ: implications for dietary interventions. J. Am. Diet. Assoc. 1998; 98: 1412–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4Patterson, RE, Kristal, AR, White, E. Do beliefs, knowledge, and perceived norms about diet and cancer predict dietary change? Am. J. Public Health 1996; 86: 1394–400.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5Kloeblen, AS, Batish, SS. Understanding the intention to permanently follow a high folate diet among a sample of low-income pregnant women according to the Health Belief Model. Health Educ. Res. 1999; 14: 327–38.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6Schafer, RB, Keith, PM, Schafer, E. Predicting fat in diets of marital partners using the health belief model. J. Behav. Med. 1995; 18: 419–33.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
7Strychar, IM, Potvin, L, Pineault, R, Pineau, R, Prevost, D. Changes in knowledge and food behavior following a screening program held in a supermarket. Can. J. Public Health 1993; 84: 382–8.Google Scholar
8Strecher, VJ, Rosenstock, IM. The Health Belief Model. In: Glanz, K, Lewis, FM, Rimer, BK, eds. Health Behavior and Health Education: Theory, Research, and Practice, 2nd ed. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1997.Google Scholar
9Calder, BJ, Shaw, BM. The interaction of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation: some methodologic notes. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 1975; 31: 76–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10Deci, EL, Ryan, RM. Intrinsic Motivation and Self-determination in Human Behavior. New York: Plenum Press, 1985.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11Curry, SJ, Grothaus, L, McBride, C. Reasons for quitting: intrinsic and extrinsic motivation for smoking cessation in a population-based sample of smokers. Addict. Behav. 1997; 22: 727–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12Curry, SJ, Wagner, EH, Grothaus, LC. Evaluation of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation interventions with a self-help smoking cessation program. J. Consult. Clin. Psychol. 1991; 59: 318–24.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
13National Research Council Committee on Diet and Health. Diet and Health: Implications for Reducing Chronic Disease Risk. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1989.Google Scholar
14Kristal, AR, Curry, SJ, Shattuck, AL, Feng, Z, Li, S. A randomized trial of a tailored, self-help dietary intervention: the Puget Sound Eating Patterns Study. Prev. Med. 2000; 31: 380–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15Nunnally, JC. Psychometric Theory, 2nd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co.. 1978.Google Scholar
16Shannon, J, Kristal, AR, Curry, SJ, Beresford, SA. Application of a behavioral approach to measuring dietary change: the fat- and fiber-related diet behavior questionnaire. Cancer Epidemiol. Biomark. Prev. 1997; 6: 355–61.Google ScholarPubMed
17Havas, S, Heimendinger, J, Damron, D, Nicklas, TA, Cowan, A, Beresford, SA, Sorensen, G, Buller, D, Bishop, D, Baranowski, T, Reynolds, K. 5 A Day for better health – nine community research projects to increase fruit and vegetable consumption. Public Health Rep. 1995; 110: 68–79.Google Scholar
18The Surgeon General's Report on Nutrition and Health. DHHS (PHS) Publication 88-50210. Washington, DC: US Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, 1998.Google Scholar
19Bellisle, F, Monneuse, MO, Steptoe, A, Wardle, J. Weight concerns and eating patterns: a survey of university students in Europe. Int. J. Obes. Relat. Metab. Disord. 1995; 10: 723–30.Google Scholar
20Riley, NM, Bild, DE, Cooper, L, Schreiner, P, Smith, DE, Sorlie, P, Thompson, JK. Relation of self-image to body size and weight loss attempts in black women: the CARDIA study. Coronary Artery Risk Development in Young Adults. Am. J. Epidemiol. 1998; 148: 1062–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
21Harris, MB, Waschull, S, Walters, L. Feeling fat: motivations, knowledge, and attitudes of overweight women and men. Psychol. Rep. 1990; 67: 1191–202.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
22Turrell, G. Determinants of healthy food choice in a population-based sample. Am. J. Health Behav. 1998; 22: 342–7.Google Scholar
23Ferrini, RL, Edelstein, SL, Barrett-Connor, E. Factors associated with health behavior change among residents 50 to 96 years of age in Rancho Bernardo, California. Am. J. Prev. Med. 1994; 10: 26–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
24Zunft, HJ, Friebe, D, Seppelt, B, de Graaf, C, Margetts, B, Schmitt, A, Gibney, MJ. Perceived benefits of healthy eating among a nationally representative sample of adults in the European Union. Eur. J. Clin. Nutr. 1997; 51(Suppl. 2), S41–6.Google ScholarPubMed
25McConaghy, J. Adults' beliefs about the determinants of successful dietary change. Community Health Stud. 1989; 13: 492–502.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
26Buttriss, JL. Food and nutrition: attitudes, beliefs, and knowledge in the United Kingdom. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 1997; 65(6 Suppl.), 1985S–95S.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
27Meillier, LK, Lund, AB, Kok, G. Cues to action in the process of changing lifestyle. Patient Educ. Couns. 1997; 30: 37–51.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
28Nagasawa, M, Smith, MC, Barnes, JH Jr, Fincham, JE. Meta-analysis of correlates of diabetes patients' compliance with prescribed medications. Diabetes Educ. 1990; 16: 192–200.Google Scholar
29Kelsey, KS, Kirlkley, BG, DeVellis, RF, Earp, JA, Ammerman, AS, Keyserling, TC, Shannon, J, Simpson, RJ Jr. Social support as a predictor of dietary change in a low-income population. Health Educ. Res. 1996; 11: 383–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
30Keller, HH, Ostbye, T, Bright-See, E. Predictors of dietary intake in Ontario seniors. Can. J. Public Health 1997; 88: 305–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
31Bovbjerg, VE, McCann, BS, Brief, DJ, Follette, WC, Retzlaff, BM, Dowdy, AA, Walden, CE, Knopp, RH. Spouse support and long-term adherence to lipid-lowering diets. Am. J. Epidemiol. 1995; 141: 451–60.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
32Hebert, JR, Clemow, L, Pbert, L, Ockene, IS, Ockene, JK. Social desirability bias in dietary self-report may compromise the validity of dietary intake measures. Int. J. Epidemiol. 1995; 24: 389–98.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
33Kristal, AR, Andrilla, CH, Koepsell, TD, Diehr, PH, Cheadle, A. Dietary assessment instruments are susceptible to intervention-associated response set bias. J. Am. Diet. Assoc. 1998; 98: 40–3.Google Scholar