Sensory education decreases food neophobia score and encourages trying
unfamiliar foods in 8–12-year-old children
Sari Mustonen
*
, Hely Tuorila
Department of Food Technology, University of Helsinki, P.O. Box 66, FI-00014 Helsinki, Finland
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history:
Received 3 March 2009
Received in revised form 30 June 2009
Accepted 1 September 2009
Available online 4 September 2009
Keywords:
School children
Sensory education
Food neophobia
Unfamiliar food
a b s t r a c t
The effects of sensory education on food-related traits and responses to food were examined over a per-
iod of 1.5 years in school children. Children (N = 164, 8- and 11-year-old at baseline) from two schools in
Helsinki were divided in an education group (E; N = 92) receiving up to two waves of sensory lessons, and
a control group (C; N = 72) participating in baseline and follow-up measurements only. The 1st wave (10
lessons) followed the principles of the French program ‘‘Classes du goût” and the 2nd wave (5 extensive
lessons to 2/3 of the E group) concentrated on different food categories. A questionnaire assessing chil-
dren’s liking and familiarity of unfamiliar and familiar foods and food neophobia, was sent to parents at
the baseline and after each wave of sensory lessons. After education, the E group had tried a larger pro-
portion of unfamiliar foods than at the baseline. The number of tasted foods in the C group remained at
the baseline level. Food neophobia score decreased in the E group, while no change was seen in the C
group. The effects of education were stronger in the younger children. Thus, sensory education has poten-
tial to activate children to try new foods and thereby to increase variety in their diets.
Ó 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
Childhood eating habits play an important role in determining
individual diets in the adulthood (
Mikkilä, Räsänen, Raitakari, Pie-
), and children tend to base their food prefer-
ences and choices primarily on sensory qualities of food
(
Drewnowski, 2000; Nicklaus, Boggio, Chabanet, & Issanchou,
). Children may build up an image of how an acceptable food
should look, and perhaps smell, and foods not sufficiently close to
this image will be rejected (
Dovey, Staples, Gibson, & Halford,
). An unfamiliar food is a target of food neophobia, reluctance
to eat or the avoidance of new foods. Food neophobia appears in all
age groups, and its strength varies between individuals (
). Using a multi-item verbal instrument for the mea-
surement of food neophobia (
), it has been
shown to be a heritable trait (
). Although a per-
sonality trait, food neophobia may also decrease during childhood
or adolescence, thus being an age-dependent state (
). Still, within ages the individual differences are fairly stable.
It has been shown that exposures to a large variety of unfamiliar
foods can reduce the neophobic reactions towards other novel, at
least similar, foods (
Birch, Gunder, Grimm-Thomas, & Laing,
). As children age, their experiences of different foods accu-
mulate, helping them to become less neophobic because fewer
foods are novel to them (
Although food neophobia has evolutionarily been useful, reduc-
ing the possibility of poisoning from unfamiliar and potentially
harmful foods, it may have negative effects on dietary variety in
the modern environment with safe food. Especially in children,
food neophobia may adversely affect food choices by restricting in-
take of fruits and vegetables (
) and
limiting overall dietary variety (
Falciglia, Couch, Gribble, Pabst, &
). Food neophobia is not only related to willingness to
try novel foods, but also to the expected liking for novel foods (
).
Behavioral food neophobia may be reduced by exposures to
new foods (
Pliner, Pelchat, & Grabski, 1993; Birch et al., 1998
).
However,
found that exposure to
good-tasting novel foods is more efficient in reducing food neopho-
bia, while exposure to bad-tasting novel foods may have no effect
or even increases behavioral neophobia (
).
Thus, creating positive experiences with novel tastes seems to gen-
eralize to willingness to taste other novel foods (
). Therefore, parents could help their children to become
unprejudiced eaters by providing them a large variety of different
foods. However, the current lifestyle in industrialized countries
acts as a main barrier to providing regular and balanced meals at
home. Parents are busy and the need for convenience drives them
to feed their children with easy options like fast food or snacks
0950-3293/$ - see front matter Ó 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:
10.1016/j.foodqual.2009.09.001
*
Corresponding author. Present address: Valio Ltd., R&D, P.O. Box 30, FI-00039
Valio, Finland. Tel.: +358 10 381 3047; fax: +358 10 381 3372.
E-mail address:
(S. Mustonen).
Food Quality and Preference 21 (2010) 353–360
Contents lists available at
Food Quality and Preference
j o u r n a l h o m e p a g e : w w w . e l s e v i e r . c o m / l o c a t e / f o o d q u a l
(
Gillman et al., 2000; Haapalahti, Mykkänen, Tikkanen, & Kokko-
). Such practices do not promote new food experiences
among children and adolescents (
Carruth et al., 1998; Neumark-
Sztainer, Hannan, Story, Croll, & Perry, 2003
), and new means
should be developed and tested. The French sensory education pro-
gram, Classes du goût (
), was recently re-
ported to temporarily reduce food neophobia in school children
and encourage children to try new, unfamiliar foods (
Chesnel, Schlich, Köster, & Lange, 2008
). Overall, the ‘taste lessons’
aim to teach young children how to become well-informed con-
sumers who are aware of the quality and differences between
foods through their sensory impressions. Children’s awareness is
increased through exercises that focus on their senses and appeal
to their interest and curiosity. The program is intended to teach
children about the pleasures of food. As a result of the education,
children may become less neophobic. In Finland, we conducted a
follow-up study examining the possible effects of the Finnish ver-
sion of sensory education program on children’s food-related per-
ceptions and traits. The program was adapted from earlier versions
(
Puisais & Pierre, 1987; Hagman & Algotson, 2000
), and extended
to include five further lessons to deepen children’s knowledge of
main food categories (see
Mustonen, Rantanen, and Tuorila
for detailed description of the lessons).
In the following, we report the impact of sensory education, as
reported by parents, on children’s food-related dispositions and
behavior, such as food neophobia, willingness to taste unfamiliar
foods, and pleasantness of foods in general. We predicted that sen-
sory education would increase willingness to taste unfamiliar
foods and enjoyment of food. The 2nd wave was expected to de-
crease neophobia further and increase enjoyment of the specific
food categories (dairy, cereal and meat) involved in the education
program.
2. Methods
2.1. Overview of the design
A questionnaire completed by parents and assessing children’s
liking and familiarity of foods from different categories and food-
related traits was used as the measuring instrument. One-half of
the children (education group ‘‘E”) received up to two waves of
taste lessons (1st, a Finnish application of Classes du goût program
and 2nd, activating lessons on main food categories to 2/3 of the E
group) and another half served as the control group ‘‘C”. The
questionnaire was sent to all parents at the baseline and after
both waves of sensory lessons. Two age groups were included to
study whether the possible effect of education is age-dependent
(
). The E group was further divided into
two subgroups receiving either one or two waves of education
(E1 and E2). The 2nd wave of education was included to examine
whether the impact of education could be strengthened by an
additional module. The education was expected to decrease food
neophobia and thus, increase the willingness to taste unfamiliar
foods, and affect positively children’s dietary variety.
The follow-up data were collected over three semesters, with
the following schedule for the completion of the questionnaire
(
): January 2005 (baseline), May 2005 (1st follow-up), and
May 2006 (2nd follow-up). The entire follow-up study extended
over 2 years, with a final data point on chemosensory performance
in January 2007 (
).
2.2. Subjects
Initially 244 students (aged 8–11 years) from two primary
schools in Helsinki were recruited. The data were complete for
164 subjects that were used in analyses. In the beginning of the
study, the subjects were students at the 2nd (8 years) and 5th
(11 years) grades in the Viikki Teacher Training School at Univer-
sity of Helsinki (E group, N = 92) and Puistola Primary School (C
group, N = 72). The population characteristics, including the
anthropometric data (reported by parents) are shown in
.
The students from the Viikki Teacher Training School at University
of Helsinki were chosen to be the E group, because sensory lessons
fitted into their curriculum.
Sensory lessons were provided to classes, not to individuals, for
which reason randomization of the students to the treatment and
control groups was not possible. However, the schools chosen were
approximately similar in size, and students had approximately
similar backgrounds. Parents’ education level, family size, and
the eating and cooking habits of the families were very similar in
both groups (
).
The students participated in laboratory tests reported by
in which one of the tasks was to evaluate
willingness to taste familiar and unfamiliar foods, presented as
photographs, by answering the question ‘‘Would you like to taste
this food?” either ‘‘yes” or ‘‘no”. At baseline, the mean sum of ‘‘yes”
answers for the five unfamiliar foods presented was 2.4 for educa-
tion group and 2.2 for control group. The difference between
groups was not significant (p = 0.43). For the seven familiar foods,
the figures were 5.5 and 5.9, respectively (p = 0.14). Thus, the
groups were similar at baseline in terms of behavioral neophobia.
shows the correlations between children’s willingness indi-
ces and parents’ ratings of FNS and behavioral neophobia of their
children. Although moderate, the correlations were of the same
range with correlations obtained from adults who report their
January 2005
BASELINE MEASUREMENT
Sensory instruments
Questionnaire to parents
October-December 2004
PILOT TESTING
RECRUITMENT
Informed consent (parents)
1
st
WAVE OF SENSORY EDUCATION
April-May 2005
1
st
FOLLOW-UP MEASUREMENT
Sensory instruments
Questionnaire to parents
January 2006
2
nd
FOLLOW-UP MEASUREMENT
Sensory instruments
2
nd
WAVE OF SENSORY EDUCATION
(for 2/3 of the education group)
May 2006
3
rd
FOLLOW-UP MEASUREMENT
Sensory instruments
Questionnaire to parents
January 2007
4
th
FOLLOW-UP MEASUREMENT
Sensory instruments
BASELINE
MEASUREMENT
1
st
FOLLOW-UP
MEASUREMENT
2
nd
FOLLOW-UP
MEASUREMENT
Fig. 1. Flow chart of the experimental procedure of the follow-up study. Data points
reported in this paper are marked with dashed line.
354
S. Mustonen, H. Tuorila / Food Quality and Preference 21 (2010) 353–360
willingness and FNS items (
Tuorila, Lähteenmäki, Pohjalainen, &
Lotti, 2001; Pliner & Salvy, 2006
). Thus, parents’ ratings should reli-
ably reflect their children’s behavior.
The study protocol followed the ethical principles of sensory
testing in our laboratory, approved by the ethical committee of
the Faculty of Agriculture and Forestry. An additional approval
was applied as the subjects were minors (under 18 years of age).
The subjects’ parents signed an informed consent before the study
began. The subjects themselves gave a verbal assent to participate.
2.3. Overview of the study protocol
At the baseline (January 2005), a questionnaire was sent to par-
ents. The pleasantness and familiarity of 36 foods were queried and
Food Neophobia Scale (FNS); 10 items, modified from the original
(
) by couching the items in terms of the chil-
dren’s behavior was presented. After that the children were di-
vided into two groups: an E group (N = 92) receiving ten sensory
lessons following the principles of the French program ‘‘Classes
du goût”, revised and updated based on the current scientific
knowledge, and a C group (N = 72) receiving no lessons. After the
1st education wave (May 2005), a questionnaire on pleasantness
and familiarity of 48 foods (36 + 12 unfamiliar) and FNS was sent
to parents. The 2nd wave of sensory education (February–April
2006) was given to 2/3 of the original E group, and it consisted
of five extensive lessons concentrating on different food categories
(cereal, dairy and meat), one at a time. The two education groups
are called E1 (N = 32, receiving one wave of education) and E2
(N = 60, receiving two waves of education). The C group was the
same throughout the study. At the final follow-up (May 2006), a
questionnaire on children’s level of pleasantness and familiarity
of 60 foods (36 original + 12 unfamiliar + 12 unfamiliar), and FNS
was sent to parents (
2.4. Questionnaire
The questionnaire started with questions on the child’s demo-
graphics, height and weight, and the attention the child normally
paid to the appearance, odor, taste and texture of foods (
).
At baseline, a list of 36 foods, six (four familiar and two unfamil-
iar) in each of the following categories: (1) fruits and berries, (2)
vegetables and starches, (3) meat products, (4) cheeses, (5) sea-
food, and (6) cereal products was presented to the parents. For
Table 1
Population characteristics at baseline (N = 164). In the beginning of the study the children were 8-year-old (2nd graders) and 11-year-old (5th graders).
Group
Grade
N
N (gender)
Height (cm)
Weight (kg)
BMI
Total
Girls/boys
Mean (SD)
Mean (SD)
Mean (SD)
(C)
2nd–3rd
36
23/13
134.4 (6.6)
31.2 (7.2)
17.1 (2.9)
5th–6th
36
16/20
149.3 (7.3)
41.2 (8.1)
17.8 (4.3)
(E1)
2nd–3rd
17
11/6
134.7 (4.4)
30.8 (4.8)
16.9 (2.3)
5th–6th
15
9/6
148.8 (9.7)
37.6 (7.7)
16.0 (5.0)
(E2)
2nd–3rd
25
9/16
131.4 (6.5)
28.3 (5.3)
16.4 (2.5)
5th–6th
35
14/21
151.5 (7.6)
43.9 (9.0)
18.4 (4.1)
a
No sensory education.
b
One wave of sensory education.
c
Two waves of sensory education.
Table 2
Modes
on parents’ education, on family sizes, and on eating and cooking habits of the families in control group and on education group (E1 and E2 combined) (N = 164).
Variable
Control (N = 72)
Education (N = 92)
Number of adults in the family
2
2
Number of children in the family
2
2
Highest education level
University degree
University degree
Eating together
At least once a day
Almost daily
Eating self-prepared food
Almost daily
Almost daily
Eating frozen dishes
1–2 times a week
1–2 times a week
Eating in pizzerias
Less than once a month
Less than once a month
Eating in hamburger restaurants
Less than once a month
Less than once a month
*
Also the distributions and mean values of these variables were similar in both groups.
Table 3
Baseline correlations (Pearson’s r) between children’s ratings on willingness to try unfamiliar foods and parents’ ratings on their children’s food neophobia and behavioral
neophobia (number of tasted foods among the 10 most unfamiliar foods). Test–retest correlations (Pearson) for FNS at baseline vs. 1st follow-up vs. 2nd follow-up.
Group
Willingness to try
(children) vs. FNS (parents)
Willingness to try (children)
vs. number of tasted foods (parents)
FNS baseline vs.
FNS 1st follow-up (parents)
FNS 1st follow-up vs.
2nd follow-up (parents)
Control
.84
Education 1
.72
Education 2
.83
.75
*
All subjects
.82
*
Correlation significant at the 0.05 level.
**
Correlation significant at the 0.01 level.
S. Mustonen, H. Tuorila / Food Quality and Preference 21 (2010) 353–360
355
the estimation of behavioral neophobia, they were asked how
familiar their child was with these foods on a 5-point scale:
1 = ‘he/she does not recognize this product’, 2 = ‘he/she recognizes
the product, but has not tasted it’, 3 = ‘he/she has tasted this prod-
uct’, 4 = ‘he/she occasionally eats this product’, and 5 = ‘He/she reg-
ularly eats this product’ (
). The parents were also
asked how pleasant/unpleasant their child finds the same 36 foods
on a 7-point scale: 1 = ‘very unpleasant’, 2 = ‘moderately unpleas-
ant’, 3 = ‘slightly unpleasant’, 4 = ‘neither pleasant nor unpleasant’,
5 = ‘slightly pleasant’, 6 = ‘moderately pleasant’, 7 = ‘very pleasant’.
The option ‘has not tasted’ was also given. Same questions were in-
cluded in the next two extended questionnaires, but the number of
queried foods was increased. For the foods at the baseline and in
the 1st follow-up, see
. In the 2nd (final) follow-up, the
questionnaire was extended with the following foods: blood grape-
fruit, fig, arugula, chard, noodles, tofu, cocoa milk, Manchego, ton-
gue, ostrich meat, blue mussel and oysters (results not reported).
Following was the Food Neophobia Scale (FNS) (
), which is a validated 10-item questionnaire (five
positive and five negative items), which, when filled in by the
parents, has been proven to be a good measure of children’s food
neophobia (
). In the questionnaire, the items were
couched in terms of the children’s behavior, for example ‘‘I do
not trust new foods” was changed to ‘‘My child does not trust
new foods”. The FNS was included in all three questionnaires. In
addition, questions on the families’ eating and cooking habits were
included in the baseline questionnaire.
2.5. Sensory education program
The 1st wave of sensory education program between the base-
line and the 1st follow-up measurement, held in February–April
2005, comprised of nine sensory lessons and a restaurant visit.
The lessons followed the principles of the program ‘‘Classes du
goût” (
), but the contents and reference mate-
rials were modified to suit in the Finnish environment and the cur-
rent scientific knowledge. Each lesson comprised of a short lecture
(adapted to be suitable for children) on the topic, discussion and
practical exercises. The lessons are described in detail in
.
The 2nd wave of sensory education took place in February–
April 2006, and consisted of five lessons related to specific food
categories: dairy, cereal and meat. We did not manage to con-
vince any fruit, vegetable, or fish supplier for collaboration on
the lessons. Two school classes out of three from the E group par-
ticipated in the 2nd wave, because we were interested in the
impact of each wave separately. The 2nd wave was performed
in collaboration with Finnish food industries. The lessons con-
tained a short introduction to the topic and practical exercises,
which are described in detail in
. In both
education waves, the practical exercises and activation of senses
played the major role.
2.6. Statistical analysis
Repeated measures of ANOVA 3*2*3 (or 2) was used, with be-
tween-subjects variables education (E1, E2, and C) and age group
(8 and 11 years), and within-subject variable follow-up point
(baseline, follow-up 1, follow-up 2 or baseline/follow-up 1 and fol-
low-up 2), to examine the effect of education on food neophobia
score (range 10–70), on willingness to taste unfamiliar foods
(range 0–10) and pleasantness of different food categories (range
1–7). The effect of education was expected to appear as an interac-
tion of education x follow-up point. When a trend for age group
difference was observed (main effect of age group or interaction
of education x age group x follow-up point), the two age groups
were analyzed separately.
The individual FNS score was a sum of scores for each item
(those negative to food neophobia reversed), ranging from 10 to
70. The internal reliability of the scale, Cronbach’s alpha, was
0.91 in all three measurements. The test–retest correlations are
shown in
For analyzing willingness to taste the unfamiliar foods, a new
variable was created. A food was regarded as unfamiliar, if its mean
familiarity in the whole study population was lower than 3 (=a
child has tasted the food). Based on this principle, 10 foods at the
baseline were included to the group of unfamiliar foods. Familiar-
ity ratings were then recoded into two categories: 1–2 = 0 (not
tasted) and 3–5 = 1 (tasted). After that, a sum of the 10 most unfa-
miliar foods (mean rating of familiarity at baseline <3) tasted was
calculated for each subject and each measurement. Thus, the range
of ‘tasting score’ was 0–10.
For analyzing the overall pleasantness of the foods in different
categories, again new variables were created. A mean pleasantness
score (range 1–7) for eight foods (four familiar and four unfamiliar)
in each of the six food categories (fruit and berry, vegetables and
Table 4
Correlations (Pearson’s r) between familiarity and pleasantness of the queried foods at the baseline and in the 1st and 2nd follow-up (48, six food categories). Foods in each
category (columns) are arranged in descending order of familiarity. The 10 most unfamiliar foods are marked in bold italics. The cells including foods added in the 1st and 2nd
follow-up are marked with grey background.
356
S. Mustonen, H. Tuorila / Food Quality and Preference 21 (2010) 353–360
starches, cereal, dairy, meat, and seafood) was calculated for ques-
tionnaire results after the 1st and 2nd education wave. The overall
pleasantness was calculated and analyzed also separately for unfa-
miliar and familiar foods in each food category.
Pearson’s correlation coefficients (r) between familiarity and
pleasantness of the 36 queried foods at the baseline were calcu-
lated. To assess the reliability of the parents’ estimate on their chil-
dren’s neophobia and number of tasted foods, a correlation
between baseline FNS score, number of tasted unfamiliar foods
and the number of unfamiliar foods children themselves reported
to be willing to taste in the baseline laboratory task (
), was calculated using Pearson’s r (
). All analyses
were conducted with SPSS
Ò
, version 15, and p 6 0.05 was taken as
the level of significance throughout the analyses.
3. Results
3.1. Correlation between familiarity and pleasantness of the foods at
the baseline
The less familiar a food was, the higher was the correlation be-
tween familiarity and pleasantness (
). For fruits and berries,
Pearson’s r varied from 0.55 (apple) to 0.74 (guava), and for vege-
tables and starches, from 0.19 (rice) to 0.86 (shiitake). For cereals, r
ranged from 0.51 (rye bread) to 0.91 (couscous); for cheeses from
0.74 (processed cheese) to 0.84 (Mozzarella), for meat products
from 0.42 (meat balls) to 0.88 (bratwurst), and for seafood, from
0.44 (fish sticks) to 0.79 (mustard herring and sushi).
3.2. Number of tasted unfamiliar foods (behavioral neophobia)
The two E groups (E1 and E2) and the C group were compared
for the number of ten most unfamiliar foods (
) tasted in
each of the three measurement points. The three groups did not
differ from each other in terms of the number of tasted unfamiliar
foods [main effect of education F(2,88) = 1.00, p = 0.37]. The older
children tended to have tasted a greater number of unfamiliar
foods compared to the younger group [main effect of age group F
(1,88) = 3.76, p = 0.056]. The number of tasted unfamiliar foods
was at its highest in the final follow-up point [main effect of fol-
low-up point F(2,87) = 19.7, p < 0.001].
The main effects of follow-up points were qualified by the sig-
nificant interaction between follow-up point and education group.
After the sensory education waves, both education groups had
tasted a larger number of the queried ten foods than at the base-
line. In the control group, the number of tasted foods remained
at the baseline level throughout the study period [interaction of
education x follow-up point F(4,176) = 3.22, p = 0.014]. The effect
was significant for the younger children [interaction of education
x follow-up point F(4, 86) = 4.18, p = 0.004]. For the older group
the education effect was not significant (p = 0.44), but the direction
was similar as for the younger group (
). E2 group differed
from the E1 group significantly in the younger age group, while
in the older age group no difference was found (Tukey).
3.3. Food neophobia score
At baseline, the three groups did not differ from each other in
terms of food neophobia score [main effect of education
F(2,98) = 0.51, p = 0.6], nor did the age groups [main effect of age
group F(1,98) = 0.25, p = 0.62]. The baseline FNS score reported by
the parents and number of unfamiliar foods the children reported
to be willing to taste in the laboratory were negatively correlated
(r =
.32) (p < 0.01) (
The main effects of follow-up points were qualified by the sig-
nificant interaction between follow-up point and education group.
Sensory education decreased the food neophobia score, while no
change was seen in the C group during the study period [interac-
tion of education x follow-up point F(4,196) = 2.77, p = 0.029]
(
a and b). The effect was significant for the younger children
[interaction of education x follow-up point F(4,102) = 2.59,
p = 0.041] (
a), while it did not reach significance in the older
group despite of a similar trend (p = 0.14) (
b). In the end of the
study, the neophobia was at its lowest in the group receiving both
waves of sensory education (E2) for both age groups. E2 group dif-
fered from the E1 group significantly in the younger age group,
while in the older age group no difference was found (Tukey).
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
C (N=36)
E1 (N=17)
E2 (N=25)
C (N=36)
E1 (N=15)
E2 (N=35)
2.-3. graders
5.-6. graders
N tasted unfamiliar foods
Baseline
After 1st wave
After 2nd wave
Fig. 2. Mean number (+SEM) of tasted foods among the10 most unfamiliar foods (at
baseline, after 1st education wave and in the end) of the C group (N = 72, no sensory
education), E1 group (N = 32, one wave of sensory education) and E2 group (N = 60,
two waves of sensory education).
30
35
40
45
Baseline
After 1st wave
After 2nd wave
FNS score
C (N=36)
E1 (N=17)
E2 (N=25)
a
30
35
40
45
Baseline
After 1st wave
After 2nd wave
FNS score
C (N=36)
E1 (N=15)
E2 (N=35)
b
Fig. 3. Mean score (+SEM) of Food Neophobia Scale (FNS) of (a) the younger
children (2–3 grades) and (b) the older children (5–6 grades) of the C group (N = 72),
E1 group (N = 32), and E2 group (N = 60) measured at the baseline, after the 1st
education wave and in the end (after the 2nd education wave).
S. Mustonen, H. Tuorila / Food Quality and Preference 21 (2010) 353–360
357
3.4. Pleasantness of the food categories
The mean ratings of pleasantness were higher in the 2nd than in
the 1st follow-up for cheeses [main effect of follow-up point
F(1,99) = 20.84, p < 0.001], and for vegetables and starches
[F(1,96) = 12.93, p < 0.001], and tended to be higher for seafood
[F(1,95) = 3.52, p = 0.064]. For other food groups, the ratings of
pleasantness did not differ. The pleasantness ratings of meat prod-
ucts tended to be higher in the older than in the younger children
[main effect of age group F(1,88) = 3.47, p = 0.066],while no other
age group effects existed. For cereal products, the C group tended
to rate the pleasantness lower than did the two E groups [main ef-
fect of education F(2,92) = 3.09, p = 0.05]. According to Tukey’s test,
the two E groups did not differ from each other (p = 0.83). Other-
wise, the three groups did not differ in terms of pleasantness rat-
ings of food groups.
The mean ratings of pleasantness for the cereal products in-
creased in the E2 group during the 2nd education wave, while
the ratings remained stable in the C group and in the E1 group
[interaction of education x follow-up point F(2,92) = 5.55, p =
0.005] (
a). In the E groups, the ratings were higher than in
the C group in both measurements (
a). The interaction effect
was significant for the older group [F(2,48) = 4.5, p = 0.016], but not
for the younger group [F(2,44) = 2.08, p = 0.14]. For cheeses, the
ratings of pleasantness tended to increase in both E groups, while
they remained at the same level in the C group [interaction of edu-
cation x follow-up point F(2,99) = 2.30, p = 0.105] (
b). The
interaction effect was stronger for the older group [F(2,52) = 2.63,
p = 0.08] than for the younger group [F(2,47) = 1.31, p = 0.28]. The
pleasantness ratings of meat products remained at the same level
in all three groups [interaction of education x follow-up point
F(2,88) = 0.001, p = 0.999] (
c). Vegetables and starches tended
to be rated more pleasant by both E groups in the end compared to
the 1st follow-up, while no change in ratings was seen in the C
group [interaction of education x follow-up point F(2,96) = 2.58,
p = 0.081] (
d). The interaction effect was stronger for the
younger group [F(2,45) = 2.63, p = 0.083], while for the older group
it was far from significance [F(2,51) = 0.10, p = 0.90]. For seafood
[interaction
of
education
x
follow-up
point
F(2,95) = 0.72,
p = 0.49] (
e) and for fruits and berries [interaction of educa-
tion x follow-up point F(2,85) = 1.73, p = 0.18] (
f) no signifi-
cant effects were found.
For familiar foods, the mean ratings of pleasantness in each
food category were approximately at the level 6 (max = 7), while
for unfamiliar foods this value was approximately 2. In the
analyses of mean pleasantness ratings of unfamiliar foods only,
significant effects were found for seafood [interaction of educa-
tion x follow-up point F(2,97) = 3.64, p = 0.03], and for cereal
[interaction
of
education
x
follow-up
point
F(2,97) = 4.20,
p = 0.018]: the ratings of pleasantness of the E2 group increased
after the 2nd education wave, while for the C and E1 group the
ratings remained the same.
3
4
5
6
After 1st wave
After 2nd wave
Follow-up
Mean pleasantness
C (N=72)
E1 (N=32)
E2 (N=60)
3
4
5
6
After 1st wave
After 2nd wave
Follow-up
Mean pleasantness
C (N=72)
E1 (N=32)
E2 (N=60)
a
b
3
4
5
6
After 1st wave
After 2nd wave
Follow-up
Mean pleasantness
C (N=72)
E1 (N=32)
E2 (N=60)
3
4
5
6
After 2nd wave
After 1st wave
Follow-up
Mean pleasantness
C (N=72)
E1 (N=32)
E2 (N=60)
c
d
3
4
5
6
After 1st wave
After 2nd wave
Follow-up
Mean pleasantness
3
4
5
6
Follow-up
Mean pleasantness
e f
After 2nd wave
After 1nd wave
C (N=72)
E1 (N=32)
E2 (N=60)
C (N=72)
E1 (N=32)
E2 (N=60)
Fig. 4. Mean pleasantness (+SEM) of (a) cereal products, (b) cheeses, (c) meat products, (d) vegetables and starches, (e) seafood, and (f) fruits and berries of the C group
(N = 72), E1 group (N = 32), and E2 group (N = 60) measured after the 1st and after the 2nd education wave.
358
S. Mustonen, H. Tuorila / Food Quality and Preference 21 (2010) 353–360
4. Discussion
4.1. Trying unfamiliar foods
The sensory education program aimed to encourage variety in
eating, by exposing children to diverse foods during the lessons.
This aim was accomplished, as in the end of the study, children
in the education groups had tasted a larger number of unfamiliar
foods than at the baseline, while no change was seen in the control
group. The greatest increase was in the younger children of the
group receiving two waves of sensory education. The sensory edu-
cation provides children encouragement to taste unfamiliar foods
via increased awareness of and curiosity towards foods and via
peer interaction. The increase in tasting of new, unfamiliar foods
is probably due to both social influence by peers (
and enthusiastic teacher modelling (
),
both elements being present in this setting (
).
Sensory education decreased food neophobia scores. The effect
was strongest in the group receiving both waves of education. In
the younger group of children receiving only one education wave,
food neophobia scores decreased and remained at the same level
until the end of the study. In the older children, food neophobia
tended to decrease after the 1st education wave, but in the final
measurement nine months after the education their food neophobia
tended to rise again. This is line with the results by
, who found that food neophobia decreased due to the sen-
sory education only temporarily. The 2nd education wave, in turn,
seemed to further decrease food neophobia from the level it was
after the 1st education wave, especially in the younger children.
As the final measurement was conducted right after the 2nd educa-
tion wave, the stability of the effect remains unknown. Yet, the
rather large changes in the food neophobia level support the view
that food neophobia may not fully be a stable personality trait but
rather a state prone to changes, especially in children (
). In the older group of the present study, similarly to the
French study (
), the effects of sensory education
on the decrease in food neophobia seemed to be only temporary. On
the contrary, the younger children maintained the increase in num-
ber of tasted foods and the decrease in FNS scores over the 1-year
period even when they did not receive further lessons.
Overall, the effect of sensory education was stronger in the
younger children. Similar results were achieved in France (
). This suggests that a suitable age to start the sensory
education program could be 8 years (or even earlier). At that age,
flavor preferences and eating habits are still formatting (
). One of the reported reasons to dislike a certain food
in children under 9 years of age is commonly ‘‘do not know the
food” (
). The sensory and cognitive infor-
mation given in the sensory lessons can thus effectively intervene
in the development of food preferences.
showed that an exposure-to-novel-foods manipu-
lation had an effect on younger but not on older rats (although
the older group were adult rats).
4.2. Relationship between familiarity and pleasantness of the foods at
baseline
At the baseline, the relationship between familiarity and pleas-
antness was dependent on the overall familiarity of the food. The
highest correlations between familiarity and pleasantness were
observed for the most unfamiliar foods. The lowest correlations be-
tween familiarity and pleasantness were for familiar staple foods
rice and potato. This is not surprising, as more or less all children
know potato and rice very well and consume them regularly, with-
out paying attention to their liking. On the contrary, if a child is
familiar with and a regular user of an unfamiliar food, he or she
most likely also finds that food pleasant. It has also been shown
that especially children base their food preferences and choices
primarily on sensory qualities of food (
). The strong correlations may partly be due to the
higher variation in pleasantness scores of the unfamiliar foods
compared to the scores of familiar foods, thus ratings within the
middle range (and the lack of extreme ratings) lead to low
correlations.
4.3. The pleasantness of the food categories
The 2nd wave of sensory education had slight effects on the
overall pleasantness of different food categories. Of the main food
categories included in the education program, the largest increase
in pleasantness was seen for cereal products. The pleasantness of
cheeses also increased in both education groups compared with
the control group. For meat products, no change in pleasantness
ratings was seen at any stage of the study. Vegetables and starches
were not included in the 2nd education wave, but their pleasant-
ness increased in both education groups, while it remained at the
same level in the control group throughout the study. The increase
in pleasantness ratings may be seen as a delayed effect due to the
tasks related to vegetables in the 1st education wave, as familiarity
has been proven to increase preference for various foods (
), especially for vegetables (
). Yet, the lack of increase in pleasantness scores
of seafood and fruits and berries underlines the importance of
exposures to different and specific food categories, when the aim
is to encourage varied consumption.
4.4. Methodological issues
One may question the reliability of parents’ ratings on behalf of
their children. However, children’s levels of behavioral neophobia
have been shown to be significantly related to their levels of trait
neophobia and to their parents’ predictions of their willingness
to eat the foods (
). In this study, these two measure-
ments were also significantly correlated. In addition, parents have
shown high accuracy in predicting their children’s food preferences
(
Mata, Scheibehenne, & Todd, 2008
). Parents appear to make their
predictions by using specific knowledge about their child’s likes
and dislikes and by projecting their own preferences. Thus, par-
ents’ contribution in studies on children’s food-related behavior
has been widely used in previous studies, e.g.
on genetic and environmental influences on
food neophobia of 8–11-year-old; and
on col-
lection of dietary data from 10-year-old.
In recruiting, the parents were told that the study is about
tastes, smells and food. The phrase ‘sensory education’ was not
brought up in any phase of the study. Despite the effort to mini-
mise the information given on the study, parents filling in the
questionnaires were probably more or less vaguely aware of their
children participating in the sensory education program. Thus a
risk exists for demand bias, an experimental effect produced by
the respondent’s motivation to please the experimenter and to
confirm what they believe is the experimental hypothesis (
) although the individual interviews (
) showed
that the parents did not know much of the contents of the pro-
gram. Yet, given the age of the study population and the vast num-
ber of laboratory tests, it would have been impossible to collect the
data without the contribution from the parents. Furthermore, the
questions presented to parents were such that they were expected
to be appropriate informants, as parents mainly buy and serve the
foods for children at the age of our study population. In several
cases the parents reported having filled in the questionnaires to-
gether with their child.
S. Mustonen, H. Tuorila / Food Quality and Preference 21 (2010) 353–360
359
Food neophobia is considered to be a personal trait that should
not be prone to changes. The present as well as another study (
) indicate a range in food neophobia score. We can
assume that the individual disposition to relate to unfamiliar or
new foods is a persistent and heritable trait (
), but it is possible that the instruments developed to quantify
this disposition evince behavioral changes that may take place
even when the underlying disposition remains unchanged.
5. Conclusions
The sensory education encouraged children to taste foods they
had not tasted before. The unprejudiced disposition to new food
experiences was seen also in the decreasing food neophobia score.
Eventually, the increased willingness to taste unfamiliar foods may
lead to a healthier diet, as people eating a variety of foods often
also eat healthier (
Jonsson, Ekström, & Gustafsson, 2005
). The im-
proved skills and interest in food and eating can broaden the per-
spectives to foods and eating and provide tools to cope with food
choices. Positive attitude towards food together with preparedness
to taste unfamiliar foods should serve as an incentive to set up sen-
sory education lessons as part of school program of young children.
Acknowledgements
This study was funded by the research program of Ministry of
Agriculture and Forestry, by Finnish Innovation Fund (Sitra) and
by Emil Aaltonen Foundation, Finland. The authors thank Dr. Anna
Bäckström for conducting the lessons in the 1st education wave,
research technician Kaisu Taskila for her skillful help during the
lessons, and Heli Esselström for contributions to early phases of
implementation. The representatives of the Finnish companies Va-
lio Ltd., Raisio Ltd., Fazer Bakeries and Biofincon Ltd., and Mr. Olavi
Törmä, MSc, from the meat pilot plant of the Department of Food
Technology are thanked for contributions to 2nd education wave.
We are grateful to the children and their parents for active partic-
ipation and for all efforts. The interest and encouragement of the
SAPERE group (
), headed by Mr. Roelof
Huurneman, is acknowledged.
References
Birch, L. L. (1980). Effects of peer model’s food choices and eating behaviors on
preschooler’s food preferences. Child Development, 51, 489–496.
Birch, L. L., Gunder, L., Grimm-Thomas, K., & Laing, D. G. (1998). Infants’
consumption of a new food enhances acceptance of similar foods. Appetite,
30, 283–295.
Birch, L. L., & Marlin, D. W. (1982). I don’t like it; I never tried it: Effects of exposure
on two-year-old children’s food preferences. Appetite, 3, 353–360.
Capretta, P. J., Petersik, J. T., & Stewart, D. J. (1975). Acceptance of novel flavours is
increased after early experience of diverse tastes. Nature, 254, 689–691.
Cardello, A. V. (2007). Measuring consumer expectations to improve food product
development. In H. MacFie (Ed.), Consumer-led food product development
(pp. 223–261). Boca Raton: Woodhead Publishing Limited and CRC Press LLC.
Carruth, B. R., Skinner, J., Houck, K., Moran, J., Coletta, F., & Ott, D. (1998). The
phenomenon of ‘‘picky eater”: A behavioral marker in eating patterns of
toddlers. Journal of the American College of Nutrition, 17, 180–186.
Cooke, L. J., Haworth, C., & Wardle, J. (2007). Genetic and environmental influences
on children’s food neophobia. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 86, 428–433.
Cooke, L. J., & Wardle, J. (2005). Age and gender differences in children’s food
preferences. British Journal of Nutrition, 93, 741–746.
Cooke, L. J., Wardle, J., & Gibson, E. L. (2003). Relationship between parental report
of food neophobia and everyday food consumption in 2–6-year-old children.
Appetite, 41, 205–206.
Dovey, T. M., Staples, P. A., Gibson, E. L., & Halford, J. C. G. (2008). Food neophobia
and ’picky/fussy’ eating in children: A review. Appetite, 50, 181–193.
Drewnowski, A. (2000). Sensory control of energy density at different life stages.
Proceedings of Nutrition Society, 59, 239–244.
Falciglia, G. A., Couch, S. C., Gribble, L. S., Pabst, S. M., & Frank, R. (2000). Food
neophobia in childhood affects dietary variety. Journal of the American Dietetic
Association, 100, 1474–1478.
Gillman, M. W., Rifas-Shiman, S. L., Frazier, A. L., Rockett, H. R. H., Camargo, C. A., Jr.,
& Field, A. E. (2000). Family dinner and diet quality among older children and
adolescents. Archives of Family Medicine, 9, 235–240.
Haapalahti, M., Mykkänen, H., Tikkanen, S., & Kokkonen, J. (2003). Meal patterns and
food use in 10- to 11-year-old Finnish children. Public Health Nutrition, 6,
365–370.
Hagman, U., & Algotson, S. (2000). Mat för alla sinnen-sensorisk träning enligt SAPERE-
metoden. Stockholm: Blomberg & Jansson.
Hendy, H. M., & Raudenbush, B. (2000). Effectiveness of teacher modeling to
encourage food acceptance in preschool children. Appetite, 34, 61–76.
Jonsson, I. M., Ekström, M. P., & Gustafsson, I.-B. (2005). Appetizing learning in
Swedish comprehensive schools: An attempt to employ food in a new form of
experimental education. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 29, 78–85.
Knaapila, A., Tuorila, H., Silventoinen, K., Keskitalo, K., Kallela, M., & Wessman, M.
(2007). Food neophobia shows heritable variation in humans. Physiology and
Behavior, 91, 573–578.
Koivisto, U.-K., & Sjödén, P.-O. (1996). Reasons for rejection of food items in Swedish
families with children aged 2–17. Appetite, 26, 89–103.
Loewen, R., & Pliner, P. (1999). Effects of prior exposure to palatable and unpalatable
novel foods on children’s willingness to taste other novel foods. Appetite, 32,
351–366.
Mata, J., Scheibehenne, B., & Todd, P. M. (2008). Predicting children’s meal
preferences: How much do parents know? Appetite, 50, 367–375.
Mikkilä, V., Räsänen, L., Raitakari, O. T., Pietinen, P., & Viikari, J. (2004). Longitudinal
changes in diet from childhood into adulthood with respect to risk of
cardiovascular diseases: The Cardiovascular risk in young Finns study.
European Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 58, 1038–1045.
Mustonen, S., Rantanen, R., & Tuorila, H. (2009). Effect of sensory education on
school children’s food perception: A 2-year follow-up study. Food Quality and
Preference, 20, 230–240.
Neumark-Sztainer, D., Hannan, P. J., Story, M., Croll, J., & Perry, C. (2003). Family
meal
patterns:
Association
with
sociodemographic
characteristics
and
improved dietary intake among adolescents. Journal of the American Dietetic
Association, 103, 317–322.
Nicklaus, S., Boggio, V., Chabanet, C., & Issanchou, S. (2004). A prospective study of
food preferences in childhood. Food Quality and Preference, 15, 805–818.
Pliner, P. (1994). Development of measures of food neophobia in children. Appetite,
23, 147–163.
Pliner, P., & Hobden, K. (1992). Development of a scale to measure the trait of food
neophobia in humans. Appetite, 19, 105–120.
Pliner, P., Pelchat, M., & Grabski, M. (1993). Reduction of food neophobia in humans
by exposure to novel foods. Appetite, 20, 111–123.
Pliner, P., & Salvy, S.-J. (2006). Food neophobia in humans. In R. Shepherd & M. Raats
(Eds.), Psychology of food choice (pp. 75–92). Wallingford: CABI Publishing.
Puisais, J., & Pierre, C. (1987). Le goût de l’enfant. Paris: Flammarion.
Reverdy, C., Chesnel, H., Schlich, P., Köster, E. P., & Lange, C. (2008). Effect of sensory
education on willingness to taste novel food in children. Appetite, 51, 156–165.
Rigal, N., Frelut, M.-L., Monneuse, M.-O., Hladik, C.-M., Simmen, B., & Pasquet, P.
(2006). Food neophobia in the context of varied diet induced by weight
reduction program in massively obese adolescents. Appetite, 46, 207–214.
Salo, A. (2007). Children as food experts – perceptions of sensory education. MSc
thesis, University of Helsinki (in Finnish).
Tuorila, H., Andersson, Å., Martikainen, A., & Salovaara, H. (1998). Effect of product
formula, information and consumer characteristics on the acceptance of a new
snack food. Food Quality and Preference, 9, 313–320.
Tuorila, H., Lähteenmäki, L., Pohjalainen, L., & Lotti, L. (2001). Food neophobia
among the Finns and related responses to familiar and unfamiliar foods. Food
Quality and Preference, 12, 29–37.
Tuorila, H., Meiselman, H. L., Bell, R., Cardello, A. V., & Johnson, W. (1994). Role of
sensory and cognitive information in the enhancement of certainty and liking
for novel and familiar foods. Appetite, 23, 231–246.
Wardle, J., Herrera, M. L., Cooke, L., & Gibson, E. (2003). Modifying children’s food
preferences: The effects of exposure and reward on acceptance of an unfamiliar
vegetable. European Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 57, 341–348.
360
S. Mustonen, H. Tuorila / Food Quality and Preference 21 (2010) 353–360
Document Outline
- Sensory education decreases food neophobia score and encourages trying unfamiliar foods in 8–12-year-old children
Wyszukiwarka
Podobne podstrony:
Ebsco Garnefski Cognitive emotion regulation strategies and emotional problems in 9 11 year old ch
Ebsco Garnefski Cognitive emotion regulation strategies and emotional problems in 9–11 year old ch
Ebsco Garnefski Cognitive emotion regulation strategies and emotional problems in 9–11 year old ch
Ebsco Garnefski Cognitive emotion regulation strategies and emotional problems in 9 11 year old ch
Ebsco Garnefski Cognitive emotion regulation strategies and emotional problems in 9 11 year old ch
Effect of sensory education on food preferences in children
Effect of sensory education on school children’s food perception A 2 year follow up study
Food Suggestions, invitations and offers
Food analysis Meat and Meat Products
Actuators and Sensors Stepper Motors Stepper Motor Operation and Theory
Copland Fanfare For The Common Man (score and parts)
Für Elise Woodwind Quintet (Flute, Oboe, Clarinet, Horn & Bassoon) Score and Parts
Martini Celebre Gavotta [Saxophone Quartet Score and Parts]
Kwiek, Marek The Changing Attractiveness of European Higher Education Current Developments, Future
Summertime flet i fortepian Score and parts 2014 01 19
One more once Score and Parts
FIORELLINA Solo for Recorder or Flute (piccolo) and Band Score and parts
Granados Andaluza [Woodwind Quintet Score and Parts]
więcej podobnych podstron