Worlds apart. Consumer acceptance of functional foods and beverages in Germany and China
Abstract
This study examined consumers' willingness to buy functional foods. Data were collected from an Internet survey in Germany (n = 502) and China (n = 443). The results showed that consumers in China were much more willing to buy functional foods, compared with their German counterparts. A substantial segment of the German consumers indicated lower willingness to buy functional foods, compared with the same foods without additional health benefits. The findings further showed that in both countries, the participants with higher health motivation and more trust in the food industry reported higher willingness to buy functional foods than the participants with lower health motivation and less trust in the industry. Food neophobia had a negative impact on acceptance of functional foods in the Chinese sample. No such association was observed for the German sample. The results suggest that cultural factors play a significant role in the acceptance of functional foods; therefore, caution should be exercised in generalizing research findings from Western countries to others.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Attitudes towards functional food products can be location, population and culture specific, even among Western countries.
“Recognising that attitudes towards functional food products can be location, population and culture specific [37,44], even among Western countries [45,46]”
From The association of demographic characteristics and food choice motives with the consumption of functional foods in emerging adults (2020) · cites this paper as [44]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 38 · Cited by 147
- Authors
- Siegrist, M., Shi, J., Giusto, A., & Hartmann, C.
- Affiliations
- ETH Zurich (CH)
- Corresponding author
- Siegrist, Michael
- Venue
- Appetite
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2015-09
- Volume
- 92
- Pages
- 87-93
- ISSN
- 0195-6663 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W323082053
- Cited by
- 147
- References
- 38
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 20 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 21 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 2
- FWCI
- 13.79
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Appetite (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Consumer Attitudes and Food Labeling
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Sensory Analysis and Statistical Methods
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Organic Food and Agriculture
- Keywords
- functional foods, functional beverages, consumer acceptance, purchase intention, cross-cultural comparison, Germany, China, health motivation, food neophobia
- MeSH terms
- Beverages, China, Consumer Behavior, Culture, Female, Germany, Health Promotion, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Surveys and Questionnaires, Food Industry, Trust, Functional Food
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review