Cited by 153Nutrition, Health and Food BehaviorNutritional Studies and DietConsumer Attitudes and Food Labeling

Importance of taste, nutrition, cost and convenience in relation to diet quality: Evidence of nutrition resilience among US adults using National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) 2007–2010

Open access
Aggarwal, Anju, Rehm, Colin D., Monsivais, Pablo, Drewnowski, Adam·2016·Preventive Medicine

Abstract

Concerns with taste, nutrition, cost, and convenience are said to be key influences on food choices. This study examined the importance of food-related attitudes in relation to diet quality using US national level data. Interactions by socioeconomic status (SES), gender and race/ethnicity were tested. Analyses of 8957 adults from National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES 2007-2010) were conducted in 2014-15. Perceived importance of taste, nutrition, cost, and convenience in dietary choices were assessed using 4-point Likert scales. Education and family income-to-poverty ratio (FIPR) were SES indicators. Healthy Eating Index (HEI-2010), a measure of adherence to 2010 dietary guidelines, was the diet quality measure. Survey-weighted regressions examined associations between attitudes and HEI, and tested for interactions. Taste was rated as "very important" by 77.0% of the US adults, followed by nutrition (59.9%), cost (39.9%), and convenience (29.8%). However, it was the perceived importance of nutrition that most strongly predicted HEI (β: +8.0 HEI scores among "very important" vs. "not at all important"). By contrast, greater importance for taste and convenience had a weak inverse relation with HEI (β: -5.1 and -1.5 respectively), adjusting for SES. Significant interactions were observed by race/ethnicity, but not SES and gender. Those who prioritized nutrition during food shopping had higher-quality diets regardless of gender, education and income in the US. Certain racial/ethnic groups managed to eat healthy despite attaching importance to cost and convenience. This is the first evidence of nutrition resilience among US adults using national data, which has huge implications for nutrition interventions.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ypmed.2016.06.030

Cites

22 of 22 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Most people prioritize tastiness over healthiness when choosing what to eat.

    “yet most people prioritize tastiness in the moment of food choice.”

    From Increasing Vegetable Intake by Emphasizing Tasty and Enjoyable Attributes: A Randomized Controlled Multisite Intervention for Taste-Focused Labeling (2019) · cites this paper as Aggarwal, Rehm, Monsivais, & Drewnowski, 2016

    Results §3.1 reports that 77% of US adults rated taste as very important when shopping for food, versus 59.9% for nutrition. This supports taste’s greater reported importance overall, but the study measured shopping attitudes, not what individuals prioritize in the moment of food choice or whether most choose taste over healthiness. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Aggarwal, A., Rehm, C. D., Monsivais, P., & Drewnowski, A.
Affiliations
University of Washington (US)
Corresponding author
Aggarwal, Anju
Venue
Preventive Medicine
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016-09
Volume
90
Pages
184-192
ISSN
0091-7435 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2463074233
Cited by
153
References
22
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 21 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 28 · 2020: 24 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 1
FWCI
9.07
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Preventive Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
NIH (R01DK076608)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Nutrition, Health and Food Behavior
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Nutritional Studies and Diet
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Consumer Attitudes and Food Labeling
Keywords
food choice, diet quality, taste, food costs, convenience, food attitudes, Healthy Eating Index, socioeconomic status, race and ethnicity, gender differences, poverty income ratio, nutrition interventions
MeSH terms
Diet, Healthy, Adult, Aged, Costs and Cost Analysis, Diet, Female, Food Preferences, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Nutrition Surveys, Nutritional Status, Poverty, Taste, United States

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