The Impact of Attitudes of the Consumers on Food Choice

            The Impact of Attitudes of the Consumers on Food Choice

1. INTRODUCTION

My main concentration in attending this class is that it is of importance to my major that is Political Philosophy and Economics (PPE), and I find lessons from this class will play a significant role towards promoting the understanding of my main course.

Over recent years, the rise of healthy living and habit has grown concern on consumer attitude towards the choice of food. The perception of the consumer choice of food has been linked to the current lifestyle and health. Behavioural economics, on the other hand, explores the limits of rationality. Both of the disciplines use various perspectives, models, and theories to explain consumer and marketing behaviour. The study will explore these theories in-depth, give comparative analysis and rely on secondary data to come up with comprehensive results. The study will shed light on the grounding perspectives, psychological plausibility, and a standard approach that will be used to conduct the research.

The theme of individual’s attitudes on food choices which is my intended area of focus is essential in that it will help in changing the minds of the people on the importance of observing moral behaviours through an exploration of the impacts. Also, there is a need to change the community observation of   Food choice behaviours. And finally, the Kantian arguments on the humanitarian interventions will help analyze thoughts on Peoples choices on food type they eat.

Which type of food is preferred by most individuals?

Travelled and researched a lot and realized people choose junk food over healthy natural foods

How am I going to change people’s attitudes and make them want fit over junk foods?

My paper aims to accomplish the objectives below;

• Investigate whether people choose healthy eating now or later on.
• What are the biases present in food choices?
• Examine the impacts of eating junk foods over healthy foods
• Examine what influences individuals behaviour in choices of what foods to eat
• Examine how to influence people in choosing healthy foods over junk foods.

2. CASE STUDY

My case study topic is all about Attitudes on individuals choices on the food they eat. I was motivated to choose this particular topic because there’s a need to understand why people want less healthy foods which might have adverse effects on their health over healthy foods. In the US individuals prefer to eat junk as compared to other developed countries such as Japan and China.

The utility function concept explains the behavioural relationship exhibited by consumers when selecting a preferable food. According to Cartwright (2018), utility function makes consumers make decisions on the menu that promotes the preference and drives their satisfaction based on past experiences. The choices in this context refer to factors like cost and the environmental state of the food, mainly the vegetables. The comfort, on the other hand, includes benefits like the state of health. Research conducted by Moscati (2019) however, emphasizes that the consumers are much contented by factors that promote safety issues in terms of health and considerations like cost, which brings the likelihood of satisfaction. As such, based on the utility function, consumers tend to choose food that meets their needs based on health and pleasure.

The order of a consumer choosing food over the other is influenced by quality  and its attribute to healthy eating. This factor, however, may have residual effects such as the non-determinant on the issues of health, which can be risky. Also, using the cost as the preference factor may be misleading based on the quality of food and its significance to individual health. According to Mandel, Rucker, Levav and Galinsky (2017) consumers precisely choose their preferred food based on the quality, which is determined by factors like cost, not knowing that cost may be misleading, and not meet their maximum satisfaction. Cartwright (2018) observe that attitude towards food is established based on its ability to meet the health need of a consumer. As such, choosing between healthy eating and unhealthy eating irrespective of other factors such as pricing makes consumers want healthy diets.

The environmental context, such as the ambience and the surrounding that the food choice takes place, also have an impact on the consumer attitude and decisions. The environment filled with the aroma or the ambient scent is most suitably preferred than the background without. Furthermore, the situation with a well-structured climate in terms of hygiene and arrangement drives the attention to the food types offered. Lee, Chuang, Chiu, and Land (2017) argue that the acceptance of food as a choice is based on the sensory and properties of food as well as the psychological and physiological aspects of a person. The context of determinants  towards foods have also impact on the food choices. The consumers’ attitude towards hunger and satiety will affect the decision or determination of food as a means to replenish oneself.

Cost and accessibility of food are also determinants that influence consumer attitude towards the choice of food. The prohibitory factor thus groups the consumers based on their social income and economic status. Moscati (2019) further argues that peer groups promote the consumption of a particular group of food, making them preferred. Also, the social class influence, cultural influences and psychological impacts the food choice. Specifically, people will tend to retain their current preferred food choices than to adopt new ones. According to research conducted by Brown, Katelyn, Luther, Mitchell, and Same (2017), it was found that people cling to their used preferred food over the extra ones, mainly because of the informed satisfactions. An additional choice, however, is not a guarantee that the other food type to be chosen is great to satisfaction hence sidelined. Brown, Katelyn, Luther, Mitchell, and Same (2017) further urge that due to lack of information, the decision choices are often incomplete and rather not satisfactory to the consumer. Due to the low level of involvement and time constraints, food choices are usually made based on past tastes and behaviours and not intentions, and attitudes.

The fear of imperfectness on the decision-making process caused by biases in choice situations makes it hard to change and individual attitude. Consumers tend to retain their current location even when given new opportunities because they base their views in terms of gains and losses and preferably not in what is achieved or accumulated. The contentment on their current situation helps them to promote their self-confidence rather than adopting a new choice to bring out fear. The aspect of the grouping of the options and assessing the consequences helps in achieving high utility. Consumers may tend to integrate the current choices with the new ones and try to weigh out their possible differences to bring about assessment. According to Roberto and Karachi (2016), people weigh the difference between working in isolation and integrating the current ones with the new ones to plot out the possible outcomes either to stay with the current or shift to the original choice. The assessment in this phase includes terms of cost and benefits such as the promotion of the health state.

Positive self-concept also helps understand the way consumers attitude influence their choice of food. The belief about oneself regarding a commodity is influential.  The idea of the known food type in terms of its preference and satisfaction is thus fostered.  Consumers tend to isolate things that they feel are new to them and therefore not posing any attempt to the earlier acquired ones Moscati (2019). The belief about specific types of food, for example, the dessert does not divert any attention to other brands. This significantly brings about the attraction to only the foods that they are comfortable and confident with. The positive feelings towards certain foods promote the attitude about them.

On the other hand, negative feelings towards certain foods demean them. There is the factor of the past experiences, present and  future enabling the individuals to foresee the upcoming. These factors take into account the influence on the selection and diet quality, thus promoting their impact. The power of  past remains to be  a positive or negative feeling to present and significant determinants about future to bring about either a positive or negative impact on the choice of the food to be selected.

Kant’s philosophy provides a bright take on human behaviour and practical reasoning (Kant, 2002). Human has the capacity to reason well and determine what is right and what is wrong. Applying this to the case presented above, it is essential that all individuals understand the effect of bad choices on the food they are consuming.

3. IMMANUEL KANT’S PRACTICAL PHILOSOPHY

Kant’s philosophy is much clear on human reasoning and its capacity in the establishment of moral laws from an individual perspective (Kant, 2002). The philosophy also described the aspect of self-respect concerning some of the ethical practices in society. For my case, the idea of choosing well is not being respected.

Kant’s view on practical reasoning can be used in exploring the case presented above about Food choices. The question of what should I eat can be related to the minutes submitted by group 5 on February 26th. Kant states that people should behaviour should involve practical reasoning within their practice. Also, he says that as humans, we can determine what is right and wrong because of the power we possess. Furthermore, we have the autonomy of will and can do whatever we think is right. From the above comments, it is evident that eating junk food is a choice, and it’s crucial to have good health.

According to the minutes provided by group 3 on February 21st 2020, Kant’s formula in this discussion tends to answer the question; what should I do? In this discussion, Kant talks about freedom and how it can be either distinguished as real or abstract. Concerning our case, Eating junk can be generally attributed to the freedom of choices that we possess. According to Kant’s philosophy, human beings have been given the freedom to do things at will; this freedom tends to be overused by individuals who claim they have the freedom to do what their brains want. This tends to tolerate unethical Behaviors in choices, especially when it comes to Food consumptions.

Moral law has been highlighted in the minutes of group 6 on February 10th, 2020. This leads to the question, what shall I do? From the minutes, we can deduce that the aspect of morality is connected to an individual’s pure reasoning. This concerning our case on Consuming less healthy foods, an individual would decide to be unethical, thus compromising his or her moral obligation to the society. Despite the freedom presented to individuals, we ought to observe the critical aspect of the moral law in our daily undertakings. This will be in line with Kant and the rationality of morality.

‘What should I do’ has been documented in Group 5’s class minutes 06 as they explored Kant’s critique of practical reason. According to universal moral laws, we should act rationally. Rational morality was described as being a fundamental concept, as shown by Gayer. Group 6’s minute 7 documented that reason is as good as will and that we should have good reasons for doing everything we do. Additionally, the freedom to do what is right may be controversial when the reasons differ between two individuals. Basically, the minutes provided that reason, freedom and will be consistent to guide actions.

Looking at Attitudes on food choices from an individual efforts point of view may sound impractical. However, while some of the efforts may be imperfect, they are by far better than in the event that they are neglected. Failure is to take individual efforts that extend the blame to the entire society. If an organisation manages to establish an environment where all are respected and humanity upheld, we will not blame each other. Besides, humanity should not be treated as if it is seeking something at a price, but it is essential to make sure that there is quality in the conduct and treat it as a means. In sum, by following Kant’s “Moral Law,” it is essential to develop an ethical path towards the formulation of this policy aimed at solving the issue of Attitudes on food choice.

Kant is worried about our decisions to act and our inspirations to move. It is right now contemplations that Kant contends against down to earth reason yet demands unadulterated pragmatic explanation. Kant dismisses the way that motivation to act is restricted to just giving specialized guidance on what one ought to do to make a decent living. Instead, reason should enable us to pick the ethical standard to use in defining moral objectives and ought to likewise rouse us to act as needs be. Correspondingly to Kant, I don’t bolster useful explanation. However, I reinforce unadulterated helpful interpretation that manages our ethical quality and propels us to take down to earth activities.

Minutes 06 of Group 5 demonstrated the variation between pure practical reason and reason. According to the authors, pure possible reason is when one connects pure reason and conceptual dimension with actions. This implies that pure practical reason entails both right and steps. Practical reason, on the other hand, refers to any form of logic that directs actions and behaviour and has close relation with morality either from a deontological, empirical or any different kind of justification.

The present bias is a psychological process where the mind values eating right foods rather than healthy. Many people will postpone eating healthy when presented with a chance to taste sweet but unhealthy food. A lot of people will keep procrastinating about eating healthy while eating the foods they love. The mind is set to force the body to function according to its desires when a consumer is at will to choose food.

I have learned that the existing rules streamline behaviours in society. American countries have experienced most cases of eating junk foods as compared to other countries. The laws in America have failed to address the issue of attitude in food choices. According to the theory, different societies have different behaviours and values.

A lot of people prefer eating sweet foods at present, which are unhealthy and later consider eating healthy. A study to ascertain this unusual brain conflict will be carried out to determine a percentage estimate of present biased people. The brain conflict forces the body to eat sweet but unhealthy foods forcing the consumer to eat such foods. Later, the consumer considers eating healthy as a measure to prevent too much unhealthy eating.

Pricing plays a significant influence in determining consumer behaviour response to the type of food they consume. When the prices are constant consumer preference is directed towards quality healthy diet, but when prices exceptionally consumers choose the most affordable irrespective of its quality and nutritional values. Consumer behaviour in response to pricing reflects the choose-reject discrepancy concept in behavioural economics. According to the choose-reject discrepancy, consumer attitude towards a specific type of food is frame base on the advantage and disadvantages of the food and its impact on their health (Cartwright, 2018). Pricing in this effect causes a discrepancy on the value of food that consumer prefers. The lower the price of junk food over healthy food consumers will choose junk food due to its affordability. This explains the high consumption rate of junk foods in the United States as opposed to a healthy diet due to the price difference. The negative attitude towards healthy eating has been influenced by the current lifestyle of the people and their socioeconomic empowerment in society. In other words, the poor simply don’t have much of a choice when it comes to eating healthy, they just eat to survive, and that’s it.

Through the development of policy for the individuals who eat junk, it is guaranteed that better ideas will be articulated in the process considering the different revisions pushed for by the contributing minds. Therefore, empirically, when it comes to acknowledging what is right and wrong, it is essential to not take sides but abide by what makes life better for others and you as an individual because one would not want to be treated any differently. Kant would have translated this in terms of rights and freedoms that an individual human being is entitled to. In respecting dignity of humans, we have  duty, enforceable in this case, to respect the freedoms of all humans. This may mean developing a policy to feed who cannot afford decent food; we are promoting justice by doing what is right. Enabling the Hungry access to good food is good will not because of what it accomplishes but because the act is merely good in itself.

As an individual, I have a role to play. I intend to take part in collecting data from “Junk food Hotspots”. This will include their names, their preferences and their needs. This will provide the policymakers with a by-name list of individuals who prefer to choose junk over healthy eating. The file will be used by the service providers to understand The Theme of Attitudes on food choice from a broader perspective and to understand who in the list should be prioritized when finding solutions to eating junk foods. Similarly, the data will serve as the basis for guiding the approach to prevent eating junk because it will provide data on how an individual ended up eating junk foods. In general, providing the policymakers with the most accurate data on the Peoples attitude on eating junk will facilitate effective management of entry and exit to and from Eating junk.

Conclusion

As much as more people would want to eat healthily, they have negative attitudes towards healthy food. Others cannot afford to buy healthy food, which is more expensive than junk food. From the results provided, it is clear that the food choices of an individual are dependent on their attitude. People base their choices based on the way they view factors such as lifestyle, health, and influence of their decision to the type of food they consume. The implication  outcome is based on individual attitude towards something, which is seen through their approach to the issue. In this case, their choice of food is based on their perception of the food towards their health. Consumers evaluate their decisions based on their surroundings, lifestyle, and affordability. Irrespective of the health benefit of a given food, the ability to afford the food will determine their preference to consume it.

Following the question presented about what we should ensure People make the right choices on Food choices, ethical is to portray some sense of humanity and reasoning through the application of Kant’s philosophy and doing what is right. Failure to reason properly behave inhumanly could impact peoples’ lives negatively. Most of the problems individuals face on food choices are due to ignorance, imperfect perception and poverty. It is our role to ensure we speak out to the individuals in case there is a scenario similar to the evidence presented above. Most people think that it is the role of the law or the government to transform society. However, people fail to understand that it is the society that feels the impacts of the issues. Besides, the community is made of us and therefore giving us the responsibility to champion the needed change.  Again, people need to reason about some of the actions and critically make personal assessments before the actual engagement. Otherwise, impacts will still come to us. It is crucial for people to need a good understanding of the various social connections and behaviours in food choice. We need to understand the importance of embracing ethical behaviour I food choices and follow nutrition Considerations.

                                            Appendix

The questions in the questionnaire were as follows:

1. Your age ()
2. 15-20 B. 21-25 C. 25-30
3. Right now, would you choose delicious junk food or healthy food with average taste if the price is the same?
4. Delicious junk food B. healthy food
5. Are you in good health?
6. Well B. general C., not bad D. don’t know
7. Would you choose delicious junk food or healthy food with average taste if the price is the same for the next week?
8. Yes, I will eat junk food for my healthy choice
9. No. I will change to eat healthy food for my body.
10. What kind of food is your favourite?
11. Potato chips B. Fruit C. Fried food D. Green vegetables
12. What is your preferred gender?
13. Male B. Female C. Prefer not to say

                                                 References

Group 3 (Zhikun Li, Mckaylia Marshall, Catherine Melgar, Theresa Walters, Zhijie Zhou), Minutes 01 of THIL 250 “Practical Reasoning” Class on February 10th, 2020. Published on Canvas (TPHIL 250), under “Minutes” on February 10th, 2020, accessed on March 8th, 2020.

Group 3 (Albert Nguyen, Amrita Sandhu, Jaden Moon, Jonathan Le), Minutes 01 of THIL 250 “Practical Reasoning” Class on February 21st, 2020. Published on Canvas (TPHIL 250), under “Minutes” on February 21st, 2020 and accessed on March 8th, 2020.

Group 5 (Sim Garcha, Chae Lim, Ella Lucente, Sarah Wade), Minutes 01 of THIL 250 “Practical Reasoning” Class on February 26th, 2020. Published on Canvas (TPHIL 250), under “Minutes” on February 26th, 2020 and accessed on March 8th, 2020.

Group 6 (Li, Marshall, Melgar, Walters, Zhou), minutes 07 of TPHIL 250 Practical    Reasoning (Winter 2020) Class. Published on Canvas (TPHIL 250),  under, Minutes on February 10th, 2020. Accessed on March 7th, 2020

Kant, Immanuel. Critique of practical reason. Hackett Publishing, 2002.

Brown, J. R., Kapteyn, A., Luttmer, E. F., Mitchell, O. S., & Samek, A. (2017). Behavioural impediments to valuing annuities: Evidence on the effects of complexity and choice bracketing (No. w24101). National Bureau of Economic Research.

Cartwright, E. (2018). Behavioural Economics, Third Edition. Routledge, New York.

Lee, C. F., Chuang, S. C., Chiu, C. K., & Lan, K. H. (2017). The influence of task difficulty on context effect-compromise and attraction effects. Current Psychology, 36(3), 392-409.

Mandel, N., Rucker, D. D., Levav, J., & Galinsky, A. D. (2017). The compensatory consumer behaviour model: How self-discrepancies drive consumer behaviour. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 27(1), 133-146.

Moscati, I. (2019). Measuring utility: From the marginal revolution to behavioural economics.

Roberto, C. A., & Kawachi, I. (2016). Behavioural economics and public health. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Schroeder, E., Tremblay, C. H., & Tremblay, V. J. (2018). Behavioural industrial organization: a synthesis of behavioural economics and industrial organization. In Handbook of Behavioral Industrial Organization. Edward Elgar Publishing.

White, K., Habib, R., & Hardisty, D. J. (2019). How to SHIFT consumer behaviours to be more sustainable: A literature review and a guiding framework. Journal of Marketing, 83(3), 22-49.