Descriptive-correlational analysis reveals consumer acceptance of food products is influenced by psychological and social factors.
This study examined the psychological and social factors influencing consumer acceptance of novel food products by integrating the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) and the Food Neophobia Scale (FNS). A descriptive-correlational design was employed with 362 respondents completing a structured survey. The instrument measured Attitude, Subjective Norm, Perceived Behavioral Control, Behavioral Intent, and food neophobia attributes. Data analysis utilized weighted means, Pearson correlation, and regression modeling. Findings revealed moderately favorable perceptions toward novel foods across TPB constructs (overall weighted mean = 5.90), with Perceived Behavioral Control rated highest (????̄ = 6.05). Food neophobia scores reflected neutral to moderately cautious openness (????̄ = 3.83), with increased willingness in informational (????̄ = 4.08) and social (????̄ = 4.02) contexts. Classification identified 57% Neutral, 25% Neophilic, and 18% Neophobic respondents. A weak but significant correlation existed between Attitude and FNS (r = 0.1466, p = 0.0052). Regression analysis indicated that FNS strongly predicted Behavioral Intent (β = 0.960, p < 0.001), whereas TPB constructs combined did not yield significant predictive power when controlling for FNS. The results suggest that while openness toward novel foods is present, it remains moderate and context-dependent, with psychological predisposition exerting stronger influence than TPB constructs. These findings highlight the need for targeted strategies that address cultural familiarity, product accessibility, and consumer trust to foster acceptance. Future research should explore cross-cultural validations and experimental interventions to reduce food neophobia and enhance openness toward innovative food products.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Eddilyn Buniel-Plaza (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: