Cited by 206Nutrition, Health and Food BehaviorFood, Nutrition, and Cultural PracticesSensory Analysis and Statistical Methods

Food neophobia and associations with cultural diversity and socio-economic status amongst rural and urban Australian adolescents

Flight, Ingrid, Leppard, Phillip, Cox, David N·2003·Appetite

Abstract

Exposure to diverse cultures and higher socio-economic status (SES) may increase knowledge of a wide variety of stimuli, including food, and be negatively associated with food neophobia. We contrasted questionnaire responses from two groups of Australian high school students (aged 12-18 years) from remote rural (rural, n=243) and cosmopolitan urban (city, n=696) locations to the food neophobia scale (FNS), familiarity with certain foods and willingness to try those foods. Cultural diversity measures and two SES scales were created. City students were less food neophobic than rural students (mean FNS scores 29.35 versus 34.68, p<0.001). City students were also significantly more familiar with different foods and more willing to try unfamiliar foods, were of higher SES and had greater exposure to cultural diversity. However, the association between the FNS and familiarity with foods, willingness to try unfamiliar foods, SES, and exposure to cultural diversity, were only weak or moderate for both city and rural students. Greater exposure to cultural diversity and higher SES has some influence on adolescents' responses to unfamiliar foods, but the relationship between these factors and the FNS score is tenuous.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0195-6663(03)00039-4

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Age, gender and place of residence influence the acceptance of novel food.

    “Socio-demographic variables also play an important role: age (Tuorila, Lähteenmäki, Pohjalainen, & Lotti, 2001), gender (Nordin et al., 2004) and place of residence (Flight, Leppard, & Cox, 2003;Tuorila et al., 2001) influence the acceptance of novel food.”

    From Emerging trends in European food, diets and food industry (2018) · cites this paper as Flight et al., 2003

No citation lists for this paper

No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.

References 22 · Cited by 206

Authors
Flight, I., Leppard, P., & Cox, D. N.
Affiliations
Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (AU)
Corresponding author
Cox, David N
Venue
Appetite
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2003-08
Volume
41
Issue
1
Pages
51-59
ISSN
0195-6663 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1975837445
Cited by
206
References
22
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 17 · 2021: 21 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 14 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 4
FWCI
1.43
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Appetite (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation
  • Schweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Nutrition, Health and Food Behavior
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Food, Nutrition, and Cultural Practices
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Sensory Analysis and Statistical Methods
Keywords
food neophobia, cultural diversity, socioeconomic status, urban-rural differences, adolescents, food familiarity, willingness to try new foods
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Australia, Child, Female, Food Preferences, Humans, Male, Phobic Disorders, Surveys and Questionnaires, Rural Population, Social Class, Urban Population, Statistics, Nonparametric, Cultural Diversity, Recognition, Psychology

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