Is fruit and vegetable intake in children a rationalistic choice?

Abstract

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to assess the utility of rationalistic constructs for predicting fruit and vegetable intake in children. It was hypothesised that children's gain‐loss evaluations will predict their stage of uptake irrespective of important additional variables.Design/methodology/approachOver 200 pupils from a Derbyshire secondary school completed a cross‐sectional questionnaire assessing stages‐of‐change (precontemplation, contemplation, preparation, action, maintenance), gain‐loss considerations, prior consumption, self‐efficacy, and attitude.FindingsDiscriminant function analysis revealed self‐efficacy, attitude, and previous consumption as significant predictors of group membership for both fruit and vegetable intake. Group centroids indicated clear separation of earlier from later stages, and transitional from other stages. Gain‐loss appraisals failed to predict stage membership. Finally, 63.4 and 59.1 per cent of original grouped cases for vegetable and fruit consumption, respectively, were correctly classified. However, classification accuracy varied across stages.Research limitations/implicationsThe sample was predominantly Caucasian and from a suburban area. Thus, the generality of these findings to children from other demographics is unclear.Practical implicationsInterventions promoting fruit/vegetable intake in children may lack efficacy if they emphasise possible outcomes (e.g. benefits) associated with eating these foods. Modifying opinions and suggesting easier ways to increase consumption may achieve better results.Originality/valuePrevious research has demonstrated the importance of gain‐loss considerations in adult's stage of fruit/vegetable intake. The current paper extends this literature to children; it appears rationalistic constructs play a negligible role in children when considered within the context of other variables.