Table of context
1.
Introduction PL, LN.................................................................................................................... 3
2.
3.
1.1.
Research question PL, LN ................................................................................................. 6
1.2.
What the phenomenon scary food means to us PL, LN .................................................... 7
Methodology – choose, do and reflect ........................................................................................ 8
2.1.
Our academic field of interest PL ...................................................................................... 8
2.2.
Young adults, matured and seniors, the comparative design PL ....................................... 9
2.3.
The paradigm LN ............................................................................................................. 10
2.4.
Research strategy LN ....................................................................................................... 11
2.5.
Theoretical research strategy LN ..................................................................................... 12
2.6.
Empirical research strategy LN ....................................................................................... 12
2.7.
The ethical aspect PL ....................................................................................................... 13
2.8.
Is it doable? PL ................................................................................................................ 14
Theory ....................................................................................................................................... 16
3.1.
Food Neophobia LN ........................................................................................................ 16
3.1.1. Statements of the FNS LN .............................................................................................. 16
4.
5.
3.2.
Food neophobia vs. scary food LN .................................................................................. 17
3.3.
The phenomenon scary food PL ...................................................................................... 17
3.4.
The five dimensions of scary food PL ............................................................................. 19
3.5.
The Food Choice Model PL ............................................................................................ 22
3.5.1.
Life course LN.......................................................................................................... 25
3.5.2.
Influences LN ........................................................................................................... 25
3.5.3.
Personal system PL .................................................................................................. 27
3.5.4.
Strategies PL............................................................................................................. 29
Analytic frame work ................................................................................................................. 30
4.1.
The use of the Food Neophobia Scale PL ....................................................................... 30
4.2.
The use of the five dimensions of scary food LN ............................................................ 31
4.3.
Illustrations LN ................................................................................................................ 32
4.4.
The use of the five dimensions of scary food with pictures PL....................................... 33
Analysis .................................................................................................................................... 37
5.1.
Life course LN ................................................................................................................. 37
1
5.2.
5.2.1.
Ideals LN .................................................................................................................. 40
5.2.2.
Personal factors PL................................................................................................... 41
5.2.3.
Social framework PL ................................................................................................ 45
5.3.
6.
Influences ........................................................................................................................ 40
Personal system ............................................................................................................... 47
5.3.1.
Sensory perceptions PL ............................................................................................ 47
5.3.2.
Health and nutrition LN ........................................................................................... 52
Conclusion PL, LN ................................................................................................................... 55
6.1.
7.1 Appendix 1................................................................................................................. 58
6.2.
Appendix 2....................................................................................................................... 63
6.3.
7.3. Appendix 3................................................................................................................ 72
6.4.
7.4. Appendix 4................................................................................................................ 75
6.5.
7.5 Appendix 5............................................................................................................... 112
6.6.
7.6 Appendix 6............................................................................................................... 117
2
1.
Introduction
Globalization is a phenomenon that has existed for many centuries and it is a process, which has
influenced cultures around the world and has created connections among different countries
(Arnett, 2002; 774). Globalization has changed the world to a global village, which means that
the world has become one society, where people around the globe easily can interact and share
knowledge with each other (Arnett, 2002; 774). The Oxford Dictionaries1 (2012) defines a global
village as “the idea that people are connected by easy travel, mass media and electronic
communications, and have become a single community”. This means, globalization has moved
into our everyday life and is affecting our perceptions of the world’s events (Mazlish & Iriye,
2005; 2). Globalization has made the world smaller and we are now a stone’s throw away from
each other and with a little help from the global world, we have become immediate neighbors
(Mazlish & Iriye, 2005; 2). Space and time are no longer an issue around the world. We are
watching television at the same time as a billion other viewers around the world and we are
sharing wars, events, sports and food. We are able to go for a meal and can choose from a wide
range of local food and a wide range of ethnical food (Mazlish & Iriye, 2005; 2).
The Oxford Dictionary (2012) defines food as “any nutritious substance that people or animals
eat or drink or that plants absorb in order to maintain life”2. Food is a global word, which is
understand all over the world and it is a way people imagine the world and cultures (Phillips,
2006; 38-39). Globalization and the global village can be transferred into food, because as the
world gets smaller, we are becoming more familiar with foreign customs and their food.
According to Gyimóthy (2009), food is no longer just about nutritional qualities, but food can
also reinforce social relations and the social status, as well as motivating people to be more
interested in foreign culinary (Gyimóthy, 2009; 260). Food experiences have developed from
cookbooks to cooking shows and from cooking shows to entertainment. Television cooking
programs have rapidly developed in the last ten years and are today seen as entertainment to the
consumers. Today’s cooking programs is more about competitions among celebrities
(Masterchef3, Til middag hos) and creating wild and exotic experiences to the consumer (Nak &
æd4, Gordon's Great Escape5), than the food. Food has become a part of television entertainment
1
http://oxforddictionaries.com/ retrieved on April 18, 2012
http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/food?q=Food retrieved on April 8, 2012
3
http://www.fox.com/masterchef/ retrieved on April 18, 2012
4
http://www.dr.dk/DR2/n/nak-og-aed#/26514 retrieved on April 18, 2012
2
3
and is taking consumers around the world, while showing how different food and cultures can be
and how different we are from each other (An idiot abroad6). Can the globalization of television
programs make foreign food seem more familiar and is it actually telling us how different we are
from each other when it comes to food in spite of globalization?
Food can, in some ways, be an ambivalent feeling, especially when it comes to foreign food. It is
not merely interesting to taste foreign food, it can also be so unfamiliar, it creates anxiety among
some people (Gyimóthy, 2009; 260). Raudenbush & Frank (1999) say that humans often are
reluctant to try novel food and this food behavior is related to food neophobia. Fischler (1988)
states, that there are two different reactions to unfamiliar food; neophilia and neophobia.
Neophilia is when people love to taste novel food and neophobia is when people have a fear of
tasting novel and unfamiliar food (Fischler, 1988; 278). The reason why some people have food
neophobia and some do not, is related to the willingness to try novel food. If humans have tried
several varieties of food in their past, they would often be more open towards unfamiliar food
(Raudenbush & Frank, 1999; 261). It makes us wonder; does unfamiliar food always equal scary
food, or are other indicators worth considering? Being neophobic towards food can be related to
the phenomenon “scary food”. The science-dictionary (2012) define food scares as “a situation
when food is believed to be unsafe or contaminated, often leading to many people refusing to buy
it”7. But scary food is no longer only associated with unhealthy or contaminated food. People
often defines food as scary, when it’s sensory (taste, smell, texture, sight, et cetera) is different
from one’s own (Gyimóthy, 2009; 260). The phenomenon, scary food, can be seen as a sociocultural construction, because food preferences are learnt and a culturally predetermined
(Gyimóthy, 2009; 261). It is through food experiences we learn to discriminate between food
that is risk-free and those that are potentially dangerous (Gyimóthy, 2009; 261), which is
comparable to Pliner & Hobden (1995) who state, that social influence has a strong effect on
liking food (Pliner & Hobden, 1995; 101). According to Gyimóthy (2009), there are five
dimensions of scary food which is concerned with food neophobia; nutritional (Gyimóthy, 2006;
261), experimental (Gyimóthy, 2006; 261), aromatic qualities and visual appearance (Gyimóthy,
2006; 261), health risk (Gyimóthy, 2006; 262) and cultural learnt (Gyimóthy, 2006; 262). The
five dimensions show why some people perceive some food as scary.
5
http://www.channel4.com/programmes/gordons-great-escape retrieved on April 18, 2012
http://science.discovery.com/tv/an-idiot-abroad/ retrieved on April 18, 2012
7
http://www.science-dictionary.com/definition/food-scare.html retrieved on April 18, 2012
6
4
Even though, the globalization has made the world seem smaller, it has not changed our
individually and cultural differences, even when talking about food consumptions. Globally we
are changing as humans and globalization reveals our differences and that we as people are more
different that we may have thought, even within the same culture (Hall, 1998; 53-54). Culture is
a way to differentiate one group of people from another and Hall (1998) believes that the
purpose of studies of cultures is not to understand foreign cultures, but highlight one’s own
culture (Hall, 1998; 59). Globalization has affected local cultures, because people from different
and local cultures come together and share customs (Arnett, 2002, 774). Some people in the
western part of the world perceive domestic pets as a food taboo, but in some other cultures it is
seen as a delicacy and some cultures are often associated with exotic food like snakes and insects
(Gyimóthy, 2009; 262). Furthermore, Cohen & Avieli state, that westerner consumers
increasingly are looking for new food experiences (Cohen & Avieli, 2004; 759). Cohen &
Avielis statement have made us wonder; has globalization of food made Danes feel more
comfortable around unfamiliar food and have Danes perceptions of what scary food is changed
through time and made foreign food less scary? We realize that globalization has influenced
people and have developed people towards a more global world, but has this development
influenced Danes perceptions of foreign food in a good or bad sense or has globalization made
foreign food more or less scary?
Today, young as well as seniors, have several encounter with different cultures, because of
immigration (Befolkningens udvikling, 2010; 18). Globalization has influenced numerous of
world’s individuals (Arnett, 2002, 774) and has affected identities, because of encounters with
unfamiliar cultures music, art and food (Mele, 1996; 3). These cultural encounters challenges
traditional customs of a local culture and interfere with peoples identity, because they have to
develop a global identity, which gives them a sense of belonging to a worldwide culture (Arnett,
2002; 777). Globalization has influenced young people as well as the middle-aged and seniors.
Middle-aged and seniors remember a time, when their identity where grounded in local traditions
and these where not touched by the global world (Arnett, 2002; 781). Today’s young people are
more aware of the global world and know it exist beyond their local customs. Those young
people who grew up with more local and traditional customs know, that in the future, their lives
will be very different from the life their grandparents knew (Arnett, 2002; 781). The purpose of
the study is to research; if globalization of food has changed Danes perceptions of unfamiliar
5
food. Furthermore, we want to research if globalization has created a generation gap within one
society.
We want to construct a comparative study of the phenomenon “scary food”, to get a deeper
understand of scary food and to see if there are some similarities and differences in what scary
food is and what indicators may come into play. According to The Free Dictionary (2012)
comparative is defined as” relating to the scientific or historical comparison of different
phenomena, institutions, or objects, such as languages, legal systems, or anatomical structures,
in an effort to understand their origins or relationships” 8.In relation to conduct the most valid
research, we have decided to use Arnett (2002) as an inspiration and reduce the study from a
study of Danes to a comparative study of Danes from three generations who lives in the Aalborg
area. We have chosen to use young adults in the age of 23 to 30, matured in the age of 50 to 60
and seniors in the age of 75+. We have chosen these three generations, because we believe, that
globalization has made imprints in various ways within different age groups and this might make
people perceive foreign food as scary in different ways. We are biased, because we have the
persuasion that seniors are more likely to find foreign food scary, because we imagine they have
experienced a greater development of globalization of food during their lifetime, than young
adults, who are raised in a global world (Arnett, 2002; 781). We see young adults as more global,
because we imagine they grow up with a global awareness (Arnett, 2002; 777).
1.1.
Research question
How has globalization of food influenced three generations of Danish peoples’ perception of
unfamiliar food?
Food and unfamiliar food is a broad topic and that is why we have chosen to define unfamiliar
food as foreign food. The Oxford Dictionary (2012) defines foreign as: “of, from, in, or
characteristic of a country or language other than one’s own”9. We define foreign food as food
there is cultural different from one’s own culture. We state this, because we want to study the
global aspect of foreign food and if three generations perceive foreign food as scary and whether
globalization of food has changed their perceptions of scary and foreign food.
8
9
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/comparative retrieved on April 18, 2012
http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/foreign?q=foreign retrieved on May 22, 2012
6
1.2.
What the phenomenon scary food means to us
We address the topic and the research question by making use of theories about food neophobia
and scary food, which will be fully described in chapter 3. Theory. Additionally, we are
approaching the study within a qualitative framework, because we believe in social interactions
and want to see how people react to the topic in a social setting. This will be further described in
Chapter 2. Methodology.
The phenomenon scary food have been researched before, but because the subject is individual
understood, there is no single definition and that is why we have chosen to define how we
perceive the phenomenon. We define scary food as: “an individualistic determination on how we
as individuals find food different, odd, strange or scary, which can be influenced by several
factors from one’s life attitude, past and present experiences with food, such as upbringing,
childhood, culture, heritage, food experiences, et cetera. We see life attitudes, childhood &
culturally backgrounds, heritage and food experiences as a part of what individuals perceive as
scary food, because one’s past and attitude to life have a great impact on how we perceive things.
We believe you have to understand the concept Food Neophobia to understand scary food. Food
Neophobia is not directly linked to scary food, but can be seen as an appertaining part, because
scary food does, to some degree, consist of the fear of unfamiliar food. Food Neophobia deals
with the fact, that some people feel a fear of trying unfamiliar food and this is not the main
purpose of scary food, but it can be linked to scary food as a factor that makes food scary.
7
2.
Methodology – choose, do and reflect
2.1.
Our academic field of interest
Our field of interest in this research is three generations within three generations; the young
adults who are between the age of 23 and 30, the matured who are between the age of 50 and 60
and the seniors who are 75 years old and upwards. All of the participants in the study are living
in the Aalborg area. As stated in the introduction (cf. chapter 1. Introduction), westerner
consumers increasingly are looking for new food experiences (Cohen & Avieli, 2004; 759). This
statement makes us wonder if globalization has affected three generations perception of what
scary food is. We have chosen these three generations to see how globalization has affected three
generations during the years. We consider this academic field of interest as interesting, because
some three generations have the perception of “in China they eat dogs” and there has even been
made a movie called “I Kina spiser de hunde”10 in Denmark. This bias makes us wonder; is this
the generally idea of Asian food traditions and is this the general reason to why three generations
perceive some food as scary? This wonder is the foundation of why it is interesting to conduct a
research, where it will be analyzed what three generations, in three generations, defines as scary
food.
The three generations are defined by age. The young adults are between 23 and 30 years of age.
We have chosen these as one of our target groups, because when three generations are 23 years
old it is normal to have lived away from home for a couple of years. 11 This aspect is important to
us, because when you live away from home, you are use to do the shopping for the household,
which means that the target group have to consider by themselves, what they want to eat and
what they do not like to eat because it somehow is perceived as scary. If we had chosen a
younger target group, they may still have been living at home, and because of that they might
just have to eat what is on the dinner table, without considering what they would prefer if they
had the opportunity to decide for themselves. The matured group is between 50 and 60 years old.
This means that most of them do not have children living at home anymore, so they do not need
to consider their needs, but they can experiment as much as they want to. Furthermore, the
matured group have about 20-30 years more experience in household, and they have lived in a
time without computers, internet and the general mobility we experience today (Abbate, 2000; 1,
10
11
http://www.filmstriben.dk/fjernleje/film/details.aspx?filmid=2319843600 retrieved on April 29, 2012
http://stiften.dk/aoafamilie/danskerne-europas-hurtigste-til-flytte-hjemmefra retrieved on May 24, 2012
8
219). The same goes for the seniors who have another 15 years of experience in life. But then the
question is, if you are 75 years old is it then too late to take part of globalization and is it easier
just to do what you have done the last many years? This aspect is why it is important to use all
three generations, so we will are able to define if globalization has affected our perception of
scary food.
2.2.
Young adults, matured and seniors, the comparative design
As a way to be able to provide a conclusion for this type of research question, we will have to
identify our research design, which is a design that helps define the structure of the project.
According to Bryman (2008; 62) there are five different research designs: Experimental, Crosssectional, Longitudinal, Case study and Comparative design. In relation to this research question,
there are three groups; the young adults, matured and seniors, where we want to compare what
the three groups perceive as scary food, and whether globalization has affected three generations
perceptions of scary food. We will be able to understand the social phenomenon better when we
use contrasting cases to make a comparison (Bryman, 2009; 58). This research will be useful to
define new perspective in relation to how globalization has had an impact on three generations
perception of food. This means that we have three groups where the research will be based on
the same approach. The comparative design can be used when you want to research two or more
communities and their different socio-cultural settings such as customs, traditions and life style,
where the aim of the research is to seek an explanation for differences and to create a deeper
understanding of a phenomenon (Bryman, 2008; 58). In this relation we define a community as
the different life stages that three generation are within and by that the people they are
surrounded by. By choosing contrasts; young adults, matured and seniors, the significant of the
different patterns will be portrayed (Bryman, 2008; 60) When we choose to use the comparative
design it is because our research question state that we want to know, not just what the three
generations consider as scary food, but also why they find food scary. The comparative design
helps provide a deeper awareness and understanding of the three generations social reality,
feelings, believes and ethics, by having its focus on culture and tradition (Bryman, 2008; 58).
9
2.3.
The paradigm
Now the research design is chosen, it is the aim to addresses the research question as best as
possible, which will provide us with a deeper understanding of the social reality within the three
generation. Our ontology and epistemology will explain our world view of the research question.
The understanding of social reality is where the world may be perceived differently depending
on one’s worldview will affect our methodological approach. The ontological approach deals
with reality, whereas epistemology is the relationship between the researcher and the research
question. According to our ontology, inspired by Guba (1990), the reality exist in a form of
interactions between people which creates mental constellations of understandings of what is
truth and falsity, which is independently understood by the person who hold them (Guba, 1990;
26). Our epistemology is based on the world viewed as a subjective constellation where the
findings of the research are a creation between two people’s interaction, which basically is the
interference between the researcher and the research question. On the grounds of the ontology
and epistemology it might be possible to determine a paradigm. According to our beliefs, just
stated, our paradigm refers to Gubas constructivism paradigm (1990; 25). The constructivism
paradigm propose that facts are only facts in a specific independent framework and that a theory
never will be fully tested, because you only are be able to analyze a certain amount of the
phenomenon, which means that we never can provide a fully examined explanation (Guba, 1990;
25-26).
When the paradigm is stated as being constructivism, it will influence on the research design. A
constructivist’s ontology and epistemology are seeking to create data through the interaction
between the researcher and the academic field of interest in the research question, which in this
case will the three generations of three generations. When using the constructivism paradigm it
will force you to make a study based on the phenomenon within your field of interest, where you
research the values, traditions, feelings and lifestyles in their normal environment (Guba, 1990;
27, 70). This means that it is impossible to make a constructivist research without actually being
in the environment. This also refers to our epistemology, where the researcher will have a
subjective effect on the phenomenon. In relation to the research question, where we want to
research how three generations perceive scary food and why they perceive some food as scary,
we will have to be in their environment, which is allowed in relation to our paradigm (Guba,
1990; 20). If the research question had been about the three generations attitude towards scary
10
food, the paradigm would have been leaning more towards the positivistic paradigm (Guba,
1990; 19),
where the research method would have been different because the positivistic
paradigm seeks to be as objective as possible (Bryman, 2008; 23).
2.4.
Research strategy
Now that we have defined the research design and paradigm, the next step is to define which
strategy that will provide the best explanation as possible in relation to the research question.
This research question is created to provide new perspectives of food cultures, and if
globalization has had an impact on three Danish generations perception of food. To provide new
perspectives we will, in this case, use focus group interviews (Bryman, 2008; 473). Focus group
interviews is a method which you use to create new empirical data, and for this research question
we believe that a focus group interview is best suitable, when we want to create discussions,
interactions and reactions upon the academic field of interest. The method will be fully described
in chapter 2.6. Emperical research strategy.
When the purpose of the research is to create a perspective on how or if globalization has had
affected what three generations perceive as scary food, the method will be an interaction between
secondary literature, data collecting and analyzing. These interactions are done, because we
believe that a reflection on the gathered data, compared to the secondary literature is important in
a process of learning and gaining new knowledge about a phenomenon. As we believe in this
type of method, both the inductive and deductive method is not an option (Bryman, 2008; 1011), because of our different backgrounds we have obtained a conception of the research area
which means that we cannot be pure inductive or deductive in our research method. Our choice
of method is more inspired by a hermeneutic process (Guba, 1990; 369). The hermeneutic
process is about the interactions between gathering data and analyzing the data. During this
process you will gain more knowledge than as ones starting point (Guba, 1990; 369). In our case
we believe that creating these interactions between theory and data collecting will provide us the
best possible output.
11
2.5.
Theoretical research strategy
As just stated, the approach of the project will be inspired by the hermeneutic approach. This
constant reflection also refer to our paradigm, where we never will be able to fully test a theory
(Guba, 1990; 25), because every time we gather new information it will bring new perspectives.
This perspective will reflect on how we choose our theory and how we will use the theories. To
determine what the three generations perceive as scary food, we have chosen to use The Food
Neophobia Scale (FNS) (Ritchey, 2003), which will provide us with a general understanding of
their fears connected to food. FNS will be used as inspiration to determine what the three
generations perceive as scary food and this will be done through the use of the scale during the
interviews, (cf. chapter 2.6. Emperical research strategy), where the different statements will be
discussed (cf. chapter 4. Analytic framework). But FNS (Ritchey, 2003) will only provide us
with information about their general fears connected to food, but it will not provide us
knowledge about what indicates scary food. To get that knowledge we will use the five
dimension of scary food (Gyimóthy, 2006) where the fear will be broken into the five
dimensions: nutritional, experimental, aromatic qualities and visual appearance, health risk and
cultural learnt. When discussing and analyzing these dimensions we will end up with a deeper
understanding of, what the three generations define as scary food. In the end we will use The
Food Choice Model (Furst, 1996), to gather the information and use the model as a process of
defining what is seen as scary food. The Food Choice Model (Furst, 1996) will be use as a link
between FNS (Ritchey, 2003) and the five dimensions (Gyimóthy, 2006). The analysis of the
gathered data will be based on The Food Choice Model (Furst, 1996), where there will be a
constant interaction between FNS, the five dimensions and the data that we collect during the
focus group interviews, which will be described next.
2.6.
Empirical research strategy
After studying secondary data within our academic field of interest, we will select the most
essential aspect within the topic, which will be used as subjects in the focus group interviews.
The use of focus group interviews are suitable when you want to make a research within a
subject, which is not yet that defined. The interaction between the members can provide
spontaneous expressive and emotional opinions that would not have happened in a normal
interview between two people (Kvale, 2009; 170). We will make three focus group interviews,
12
one with each generation. It could also have been interesting to see how people reacted in a
mixed group, but then we will not be able to compare the three groups (Bryman, 2008; 58). We
have chosen to make focus group interviews because we want to analyze discussions between
the group members, an interaction that cannot be found in an in depth interview. Groups of 6
people can establish a good interaction and by that create a reaction upon the situation (Bryman,
2008; 473, Kvale, 2009; 170). The focus group interviews have a less structured approach,
whereas the point of the focus group interview is the interactions and reactions, which we will
not be able to create if the structure of the interview did not have time and space to whatever
discussion that may come up. During the focus group interviews we will use statements and
pictures. The point of the statements and pictures are to provoke the participants to react.
Before we begin the focus group interview, we will provide the interviewees with a worksheet,
with statement and pictures. This worksheet has two purposes; to provide the interviewees with a
deeper understanding of the topics, so that they are ready to discuss the topics during the
interviews, without us affecting their beliefs too much by our interpretations of the topics. The
other reason is that we are able to see if the social interactions change their opinion towards
scary food during the interview. The worksheet will be based on statements and pictures which
relates to the FNS and the five dimensions of scary food (cf. chapter 3.4. The five food
dimensions) and FNS (cf. chapter 3.1. The Food Neophobia Scale). The interviewees can only
respond whether they agree or disagree in the statement that we post. The worksheet will not be
used and analyzed as a questionnaire, it will just provide us answers about whether or not the
interviewees’ changes their minds about scary food when they join a group compared to when
they are alone. Additionally, the focus groups will not be fully transcribed, because we only are
tanking the essential parts into considerations, when transcribing the focus group interviews. We
do this on the basis of, that we do not find it necessary to transcribe the interactions, where the
interviewees are deviating from the purpose of the study.
2.7.
The ethical aspect
In relation to the ethical issues, as a constructivist there will always be some considerations
regarding the ethical aspects towards a research. The ethical issue as a constructivist arises when
we will have to provoke our field of interest to provide a reaction. To get reactions there have to
be an interaction between us as researchers and our field of interest. The interaction itself is okay
13
in relation to our paradigm (Guba, 1990; 27), but is it acceptable that we put the interviewee into
a situation where they can be confronted by others about their eating habits? This is an ethical
question, which we will have to consider before conducting the focus group interviews.
Furthermore we have to consider that we are two individuals from the group of young adult and
that is why we cannot be fully objective when it comes to what kind of food we find scary - what
is scary to us might as well be perceived differently by the matured and seniors. This means that
we have to be very careful when we choose pictures for the interviews, because the pictures we
choose to represent a certain dimension might as well mean something else when we ask an 80
year old lady.
2.8.
Is it doable?
We also have to consider whether or not the research even is feasible. We have a couple of main
limitations; to find enough participants that are willing to participate in the focus group
interviews making sure the interviewees responds truthfully and the language barrier. The group
with young adults is our own generation, which means that we have possible interviewees in our
own everyday network. It is different with the people for the matured group and the seniors
where we will have to rely on the few we know. Furthermore we want to reduce our academic
field of interest, which means that we only want to use people living in the Aalborg area,
otherwise the field of interest would be too broad, and the purpose of this study, is not to make
generalization. Another problem that arises is that we never can be sure that the interviewees
answer truthfully during the interviews. Furthermore the focus group itself can be a problem. All
the good things about making a focus group interview, such as the interactions, might as well
end up working against us. The interactions in a group can also resolve with an interview with an
alpha dog, who decides what is right or wrong, where the rest of the group will obey and not
state their own trustworthy opinion. This aspect refers to how we are going to choose the
participants for the focus groups interviews - is it a good thing that the participants knows each
other, which make them talk more freely, or would it be better with a group where they do not
know each other and then maybe speak more freely, because they do not really have a
connection to each other? We consider the best possible constellation is to create groups where
the participants do know each other, or at least most of them, where we can create a kind of
synergy where it is okay to answer freely and respond on each other’s statements. Then we may
14
be able to provide useful discussion, but we can never be sure until the situation is taking place.
The last the limitation is the language barrier. Because all of our interviewees are Danish we
have chosen to do the focus group interview in Danish. This can create two limitation aspects;
when we do the focus group interviews in Danish we may lose some contexts of the discussion
during the translation from Danish to English. On the other hand, had we done the focus group
interviews in English, the interviewees may have felt some limitations when explaining their
opinions because of the language barrier.
15
3.
Theory
3.1.
Food Neophobia
The Oxford Dictionaries (2012) defines neophobia as “extreme or irrational fear or dislike of
anything new or unfamiliar”. But how can we test neophobia and in this case food neophobia?
To determine if and why people have food neophobia, Pliner & Hobden (1992) developed the
Food Neophobia Scale (FNS) to measure food neophobia. The FNS consists of ten statements,
where people have to indicate to what extent they agree or disagree in the statements about food
or eating situations (Pliner & Hobden, 1992; 107). Ritchey et al (2003) state, that several studies
have shown, that FNS is able to predict responses to novel foods and it has been used to assess
the impact of willingness to try novel food (Ritchey et al, 2003; 163). The FNS is often used in a
quantitative framework, but we want to use it in a qualitative framework. During the focus
groups interviews we want to create a discussion to get a deeper understanding of how three
generations perceive unfamiliar food. Basically, we want to use the statements of the FNS to
create an overview of how three generations relate to unfamiliar food.
3.1.1. Statements of the FNS*
1. I am constantly sampling new and different food
2. I don’t trust new foods
3. If I don’t know what a food is, I won’t try it
4. I like foods from different cultures
5. Ethnic food looks too weird to eat
6. At dinner parties, I will try new foods
7. I am afraid to eat things I have never had before
8. I am very particular about the foods I eat
9. I will eat almost anything
10. I like to try new ethnic restaurants
* Ritchey, 2003; 164
The FNS has been used to compare different nationalities (Ritchey et al, 2003; 164), which can
be used in relation to our study of the three generations, because during the analysis, we tend to
compare if there are differences or similarities in how the generations answer. Furthermore, it
should be taking into considerations that being neophobic is an individual matter, but there can
16
be some situational factors, such as social gatherings and family reunions (Pliner & Hobden,
1992; 109), which can increase or decrease one’s willingness to try unfamiliar food (Pliner &
Hobden, 1995; 101).
In relation to this study, we are conducting a worksheet, which will be handed out before the
focus group interview (cf. chapter 2. methodology). Generally the FNS is combined with a
quantitative seven-point Likert scale, but in this case, we have chosen, that the interviewees have
to agree or disagree to the statements, which will provide some general understandings of why
and if three generations perceive foreign food as scary food.
3.2.
Food neophobia vs. scary food
Food neophobia and scary food are in strong relation to each other (cf. chapter 3.3. The
phenomenon scary food). Food neophobia consists of ten statements, which all refers to opinions
about unfamiliar food (Ritchey, 2003; 163). The ten statements are not directly connected to the
five dimensions of scary food, but they are in correlation. For example one statement says, “I am
constantly sampling new and different foods”, can be seen as part of the experimental dimension.
Another statement says, “I am afraid to eat things I have never had before”, can be related to the
culturally learnt dimension. A third states that, “Ethnic food looks too weird to eat”, which can
be related to the third dimension, aromatic qualities and visual appearance (cf. chapter 3.4. The
five dimensions of scary food). So each dimension can more or less be related to each of the five
dimensions of scary food.12
3.3.
The phenomenon scary food
We see food neophobia as the main theory, when it comes to scary food and scary food is an
appertaining phenomenon. We are emphasizing scary food, but take neophobia into
considerations, because it is a known theory that measures the fear of unfamiliar food. Food can
be seen as scary in many ways, but what is perceived as scary food and when do three
generations find foreign food scary? Globalization of food has influenced people differently (cf.
chapter 1. introduction) and we feel that the five dimensions is a way to highlight individual’s
12
Appendix 6, fig. of how we believe the FNS relates to the five dimensions of scary food, page 116
17
similarities and differences in how people perceive food and what is perceived as scary food.
The five dimensions of scary food show what indicators may be the reason to why some
individuals perceive food as being scary. Food can be seen as scary when it interferes with one’s
health, beliefs or differs from what we know (Gyimóthy, 2009; 261-262). Gyimóthy (2009) have
defined five dimensions of scary food (cf. chapter 1. introduction), which can provide us a closer
understanding to how three generations perceive food from other countries and when they
perceive it as scary food. The five dimensions, listed below arose from Gyimóthys (2009) study
“Scary food: Commodifying culinary heritage as meal adventures in tourism” and we have
adapted these into your study as the five dimensions of scary food.
Food Neophobia
1.Nutritional
Scary food
2.Experiment
al
3. Aromatic
5.Culturally
learnt
4.Health risk
qualities and
visual
appearance
The five dimensions of scary Food Gyimóthy (2009), with own approach
Globalization has influenced people worldwide and they are beginning to develop a bicultural
identity, in which a part is rooted from their local culture and another part stems from their
awareness of the global culture (Arnett, 2002, 777). We would like to research if globalization
has affected three generations to become more curious about foreign food and if globalization
has made foreign food more or less scary. To make a specific connection between the five
dimensions of scary food and globalization, we are asking the interviewees of the three focus
groups how globalization of food has affected them and if it has made food more or less scary.
During this study, we are making use of pictures to illustrate some indicators that may be able to
show what three generations perceive as scary food. The pictures is not labeled with headlines or
what dimensions we believe it is, because we would like to see how they react to illustrations of
different kinds of food and how they response when we ask them if this could be seen as a scary
food indicator.
18
3.4.
The five dimensions of scary food
1. Nutritional dimension; deals with dietary issues and the fact that you want to maintain a
nutritional diet to avoid intoxication (Gyimóthy, 2006; 261). The World Health Organization
(2000) state, that nutrition is a worldwide problem, but Glanz et al (1992) have made a research
which shows that consumers want to know more about nutrition, but is not always implement it
into their life, because it sometimes seems difficult (Glanz et al, 1992; 267)13. We want to see if
nutrition is a scary food indicator to three generations when eating or coming across foreign
food.
We want to connect globalization to the nutrition dimension, to see whether globalization of food
has made three generations think more about the nutritional content of foreign food.
2. Experimental dimension; deals with the ambivalent feeling that can occur between wishing to
try out new dishes and avoiding unpleasant experiences with food (Gyimóthy, 2006; 261).
Simultaneously, we see experimental as a part of the desire to try new dishes (Quan & Wang,
2004; 297). We want to research if three generations are willing to experiment with foreign food,
but also if they perceive inexperienced food as a scary food indicator.
13
http://agris.fao.org/agris-search/search/display.do?f=1993/US/US93032.xml;US9318117 retrieved on April 18,
2012
19
Additionally, we want to see if globalization has made three generations more experimental
when it comes to foreign food or if it has had the opposite effect.
3. Aromatic qualities and visual appearance dimension; deals with the fact, that aromatic and
visual appearance of a dish can stimulate our appetite or keep some people from eating a dish,
either because of its provoking or repelling sight (Gyimóthy, 2006; 261). Foods visual appearance
may seem provoking to some people, when for example a dish is presented with a whole animal
or animals head (Gyimóthy, 2006; 261). When sensory and appearance is different from the one
we know, it can be seen as a scary food indicator (Gyimóthy, 2009; 260). We want to see if three
generations find aromatic qualities and visual appearance of food from other cultures as a scary
food indicator.
We are seeing more and more people from different cultures in Denmark, who bring culturally
different dishes with them (Befolkningens udvikling 2010; 18). We want to connect aromatic
qualities and visual appearance to globalization, because we want to see if globalization has
made the visual appearance of foreign food more or less scary.
4. Health risk dimension; deals with the fact, that some people are afraid of being infected or
catching a disease (food poisoning, Hepatitis A) from eating food (Gyimóthy, 2006; 262).
Wilcock et al (2004) state that food related illnesses are a big concern in the 21st century and it is
a factor consumers consider when purchasing food (Wilcock et al, 2004; 57-58). We want to
research, whether three generations consider health risks as a potential scary food indicator.
20
Additionally, globalization of food and immigration has made foreign food more accessible to
three generations. We want to see, if globalization have made three generations consider health
risks connected to foreign food.
5. Culturally learnt dimension; deals with the fact, that some people can find a dish inappropriate
in relation to their ethical, religious or emotional beliefs (Gyimóthy, 2006; 262). It can be an
emotional beliefs, when people believe that a living creature must die in order for us to maintain
our life (Gyimóthy, 2006; 262).
Food is in some cultures associated as scary when it comes to religion, because it is a taboo to
eat certain animals in some countries. For example, Hindus do not consume beef and Muslims do
not consume pork, because of their religion and ethical beliefs14. This element of the fifth
dimension is not taking into consideration, because Denmark and three generations do not have
religious guidelines about animals, but have a great focus on animal welfare (Fødevarestyrelsen,
2010). Ethics are a personal and individual matter15 and in some countries it is ethically wrong to
eat some animals, where it is a perfectly normal in other countries (Gyimóthy, 2009; 262). We
want to see if three generations consider ethics and emotion beliefs as a scary food indicator in
relation to foreign food.
14
http://www.indianetzone.com/37/religious_influence_on_indian_food_indian_cuisine.htm retrieved on April 30,
2012
15
http://www.foodethicscouncil.org/topic/Ethics retrieved on April 30, 2012
21
The world has, indirectly, made the world smaller and we are therefore more exposed to cultural
different customs (cf. chapter 1. introduction). We want to see if globalization has influenced
three generations emotions and ethics in relation to foreign food.
In this study we will use the five dimensions of scary food in our worksheet and in the three
focus groups. The five dimensions of scary food will be conducted as statements and pictures in
the worksheet and as statements, topics and pictures during the focus groups (cf. chapter 2.6.
Emperical research strategy). This ought to create a deeper understanding of which indicators
that can affect three generations to perceive foreign food as scary.
3.5.
The Food Choice Model (Furst, 1996)
We perceive the statements of the FNS as why people perceive some food as scary and the five
dimensions of scary food are what indicators that potentially make food seem scary. To get a
greater perspective over the phenomenon scary food, we want to make use of The Food Choice
Model. In this study, the purpose of The Food Choice Model is to assemble the theory about
food neophobia and scary food, because the model originally is used to show how and why
people decide on a food choice. In relation to this study, we are going to place the statements of
FNS and the five dimensions of scary food within The Food Choice Models three factors; life
course, influences and personal system. Together these three factors generate a process that leads
to a point of food choice (Furst et al, 1996; 250). The connections will be fully described later on
in this section.
According to the research question, we would like to see if globalization of food has influenced
three generations to perceive foreign food more or less scary and when or if they perceive some
food as being scary. How we as people perceive food as scary is an individual matter and The
22
Food Choice Model symbolize that each individuals food choices are based, not only on personal
preferences, but also several other factor, such as influence from one’s environment and
upbringing. Based on the theory from food neophobia and scary food we are only taking some of
the factors into considerations, as well as our own approach to these factors. We do this on the
basis of, that not all of the factors are relevant to investigate in relation to our research question
and purpose of this study. This will be described during each of the three factors.
The purpose of the illustration is to illustrate how the ten statements of FNS and the five
dimensions of scary food have a connection and how these leads to a choice of why some three
generations choose to perceive some food as scary.
23
Life Course
FNS’ statement 7
Culturally learnt
Influences
G
L
O
Ideals
FNS’ statement 8
Culturally learnt
Personal factors
FNS’ statements 1- 4 & 9
Experimental
B
Social framework
L
FNS’ statement 6 & 10
Experimental
I
Personal system
Z
Value negotiations
A
T
FNS’ statement 5
Sensory perception
Aromatic qualities and visual appearance
I
O
N
Health & nutrition
Health risk
Nutrition
Strategies
Food Choice - Furst et al (1996), with own approach
“What people perceive as scary food”
As illustrated above, there are three central factors in The Food Choice Model; life course,
influences and personal system. In relation to these, we have linked the ten statements of the
FNS and the five dimensions of scary food, where we believe they belong. Globalization is
continuously connected to the dimensions of scary food, so we are able to see if globalization has
brought the world closer connected and thereby made foreign food more or less scary.
24
3.5.1.
Life course
Life course is the first of the three factors in The Food Choice Model. This factor is influenced
by the individuals past, present and future involvement with food consumption. One’s life course
influences on how we perceive and choose food in the future (Furst et al, 1996; 252). What we
have learnt during our upbringing, youth and as an adult have influenced on how and if we
choose to perceive foreign food as scary. We believe three generations past and present with
foreign food have made it more or less scary. In relation to scary food, we are combining life
course with the culturally learnt dimension. We have linked the culturally learnt dimension to
life course, because we imagine that one’s ethical and emotional beliefs come into play, when
deciding on what three generations perceive as scary in foreign food. Furthermore, we have
linked the seventh statement of the FNS to life course, because we imagine that one’s past with
unfamiliar food, influences on how we perceive new and foreign food.
During one’s life course individuals are being influenced by several factors, such as ideals,
personal factors, social framework and food context, where you are inspired in your choice of
food. We believe these influences can affect how, when and why three generations may perceive
foreign food as scary.
3.5.2.
Influences
Influences are the second of the three factors of The Food Choice Model. As the word influences
indicates, it deals with different kinds of influences that individuals are exposed to during their
life course (Furst et al, 1996; 252). We want to see if three generations are influenced when
deciding if some foreign food is scary. In relation to this study, we are not taking resources into
considerations, because we do not see a connection between economics, skill, time and the
theory about food neophobia and scary food. We do not see economic as a factor, when studying
what and if three generations find foreign food scary, because this study does not address
whether they can afford the food, but what makes food scary. Secondly, one’s cooking skills and
time are not included, because we do not examine if they have the time or skills to cook foreign
food. Additionally, we are linking the ten statements of the FNS and the five dimensions to
ideals, personal factors and social framework, because these are interesting in relation to the
theories and research question.
25
Ideals
Ideals are the first of three relevant factors of influences. Ideals are based on individual’s
personal beliefs, hopes, expectations and standards towards food (Furst et al, 1996; 252).
Individuals use these points as a way to judge and evaluate their food choice (Furst et al, 1996;
253). In relation to scary food we are combining ideals with the culturally learnt dimensions and
the eighth statement of the FNS. In addition to culturally learnt, we believe individuals’ past and
present with foreign food influences one’s ideals connected to foreign food and what seems
scary. According to the eighth statement of the FNS, we and Pliner & Hobden believe, that
defining what scary food is, is a personal choice, based on our individually ideals, because we as
people have different experiences during our life course and these are influencing how we
perceive foreign food.
Ideals are not merely the factor, which are able to influence how three generations perceive
foreign and scary food. Our personal factors have a great impact on how and if we chose to see
foreign food as scary or not.
Personal factors
Personal factors are the second of three relevant factors of influences. Personal factors are based
on individual’s needs and preferences, which are derived from our psychological traits. It is
related to what kind of food choices people are willing to make, which includes their like and
dislikes, food style, habits, sensory preferences and taste sensitivities (Furst, 1996; 253).
Personal factors can be related to scary food and Fursts (1996) study, which showed that
individuals perceive food from different cultures in one’s own way. Some of Fursts (1996)
respondents answers, that they like Italian food, but cannot connect to Chinese food (Furst, 1996;
253). According to this study, we would like to see whether personal factors play a role to three
generations, when deciding on when foreign food is scary. Additionally, we do perceive all of
the five dimensions of scary food as personal matter, but we do acknowledge that some of them
fit more into one of the other three factors of The Food Choice Model.
In relation to scary food, we are combining personal factors to the experimental dimension of
scary food, and statement 1 to 4 and 9 of the FNS. We combine the experimental dimension to
personal factors; because we believe that the experiences three generations have had with foreign
food will most likely influence if they perceive foreign food as scary. Additionally, the five
26
statements of the FNS can be used in correlation to personal factors, because we find it as a
personal choice what individuals perceive as scary food.
It is not only our own personal factors that influences individuals to perceive foreign food as
scary, our social interaction are also an influence.
Social framework
Social framework is the third of three relevant factors of influences. Social framework is based
on that individuals are influenced by people in their immediate environment (Furst et al, 1996;
255). Social framework is taking into considerations in this study, because Pliner & Hobden
(1995) state, that food is strongly affected by social influences (Pliner & Hobden, 1995; 101). In
this study we have chosen to connect the Food Choices Models influence food context to social
framework, because we are not looking at the food contexts availability of food, but only the
social setting, which can be seen in relation to social framework. We do not consider the
availability of food, because we do not see the availability as the essence of what scary food is.
The food context is taking into considerations during social framework, because surroundings
and settings can affect ones willingness to eat unfamiliar food and if it makes food more or less
scary. We want to see whether three generations are influenced by their social interaction, when
deciding if foreign food is scary. In relation to scary food, we are combining social framework to
the sixth and tenth statement of the FNS, because the statements relates to social setting.
Furthermore we are linking the experimental dimension of scary food these statements, because
we believe that individuals are more willing to experiment with unfamiliar food in a social
setting.
Our social framework are not merely an influence to how and if we perceive foreign food as
scary, but the food context should also be taking into consideration.
3.5.3.
Personal system
Personal system is the third of the three factors of The Food Choice Model. The personal system
includes the process of actual food selection, which is influenced by value negotiations and
strategies. The value negotiations include sensory perception, monetary considerations,
convenience, health and nutrition, managing relationship, and quality. Each individual are
weighing the factors to satisfy their inner needs during a food choice. The strategies involve, that
27
each individual often have to trade one factor for another, when selecting food they need or want
(Furst et al, 1996; 256). In relation to this study, we are only using some elements from value
negotiations, because we do not consider convenience, quality and managing relationships as a
factor, when evaluating scary food. We state this, because we do not see any relations between
convenience, quality, managing relationships and the five dimensions of scary food or the ten
statements of the FNS. We justify this, because we do not study if three generations consider
convenience food as a scary food indicator or their willingness to eat convenience food, nor do
we study whether three generations consider if the quality of foreign food could be a scary food
indicator. Additionally, we are linking the FNS and the five dimensions to value negotiation of
sensory perception and health and nutrition, because these are interesting in relation to the
theories and research question.
Value negotiations
Sensory perception
Sensory perception is the first of the two relevant factors of value negotiation. Sensory
perception is foods taste, texture and appearance (Furst et al, 1996; 257). We would like to study,
if three generations consider foreign foods taste, texture and appearance as a scary food
indicator. We are combining sensory perception to the aromatic qualities and visual appearance
dimension of scary food and the fifth statement of the FNS “Ethnic food looks too weird to eat”.
We combine these to sensory perception, because we perceive the three perspectives as being
within the same category.
Besides sensory, value negotiations consists of individuals values towards health and nutrition,
when choosing food.
Health and nutrition
Health and nutrition is the second of the two relevant factors of value negotiation. The health and
nutrition value deals with factors relating to disease avoidance or control, weight control and
bodily well-being (Furst et al, 1996; 259). We would like to see if three generations consider
health and nutrition as a potential indicator of scary food, when eating or coming across foreign
food. We combine health and nutrition to the nutrition dimension of scary food and the health
risk dimension, because these dimensions discuss the health and nutrition aspect.
28
When considering one’s life course, the daily influences during one’s life course and what
personal values you have connected to food, we are able to understand three generations food
choice.
3.5.4.
Strategies
Strategies are the last step in The Food Choice Model and it is here the food choice is made.
People develop strategies when choosing food and these strategies spring from life course,
influences and the personal system. Strategies are individual on each food choice, but we often
have the same patterns and rules (Furst et al, 1996; 260). We are now able to see if three
generations perceive some indicators of foreign food as a scary food indicator.
29
4.
Analytic frame work
Now that the theories, we will use to answer the research question, have been discussed, we will
describe how we will create the focus group interviews. This chapter is where we explain the
considerations we had during the producing of the focus group interviews and which connections
there is between the focus group interviews and the theories.
As described in chapter 2.6. Empirical research strategy we want to use focus group interviews
as the empirical data of this project. We want to make focus group interviews (Bryman, 2008;
473) because we search for interactions between humans and because we believe that a
discussion between individuals will provide us with a better understanding of what the three
generations define as being scary food.
At first we will provide the interviewees’ with the worksheet (cf. chapter 2.6. Empirical research
strategy), which give them an understanding of the study. After the interviewees have answered
the worksheet we will gather the interviewees and let them one by one define that they see as
scary food. During this session they will not be used any theories, pictures or statement, because
we want their core opinion about scary food. During the worksheet they will be confronted by
FNS and the five dimensions of scary food, where we hope that they will bring these into a
discussion, if not, we will not try to influence them into using these aspects, because we believe
it is important to let the interviewees state their exact point of view before affecting them.
4.1.
The use of the Food Neophobia Scale
After the first session we connect globalization to scary food. We want to know if globalization
has affected their perception of what scary food is. We expect that the groups’ opinions about
globalization will be characterized by which generation we are interviewing. After the
interviewees have discussed how globalization has influenced their different perspective of what
scary food is, the next step is the FNS. We give the interviewees time to discuss the ten
statements of the FNS. As stated in chapter 2.5. Theoretical research strategy, FNS help us
define the interviewees general fears connected to food. We want to present the interviewees
with one statement at the time, where it is important that all the interviewees explain their
feelings toward the statement and discuss whether they agreed or disagreed with the statements.
30
After the ten statements have been discussed, we are asking the interviewees to rank the
statements in a group, from which they agree with the most and vice versa. This assignment is to
see if they are able to agree or disagree to the same statement and if they have radical changes
from the worksheet to the focus groups interview.
4.2.
The use of the five dimensions of scary food
After the interviewees have discussed the FNS, where they define which fears they have towards
food, we will use the five dimensions of scary food to define which indicators that actually
scares them in relation to foreign food. Again we will make the interviewees discuss the five
dimensions and let them define what they believe each dimension represent. We want to analyze
what they perceive as a scary indicator, and see if there a cultural accordance in the group or if it
is an individual matter. We have created five statements of the five dimensions, which will be
the ones that the interviewees are going to discuss. The first dimension is nutrition, where the
statement is “I find food from other cultures scary if I do not know if is nutritional healthy”.
Furthermore we will ask them whether globalization of food have made them more aware of
nutrition in food or not. By letting the interviewees discuss the statement we will be able to tell if
nutrition is what they define as scary and by bringing the globalization aspect into the discussion
we will get their opinion on whether they think globalization have had an influence on their
perspective or not. To define if the interviewees find the experimental dimension of food scary,
we made them discuss the statement: “I like to experiment with food from other cultures, but it
can be scary, because that I do not know whether or not it will be a good or bad experience”.
Furthermore we asked the interviewees if they experiment more with foreign food because of
globalization. When letting them discuss these aspects we will be able to define if globalization
has made the interviewees keener to experiment with foreign food, and if globalization has made
it less scary to try foreign food. The third dimension is stated by: “I think that food from other
cultures is scary when it visually looks different compared to what I usually eat”. In relation to
globalization we asked the interviewees if they believe globalization has affected them to
perceive the appearance of foreign food as less scary. The health risk dimension is stated as “I
think that food from other cultures is scary, because I am scared of the consequences in relation
to food poisoning and things like that”. We asked if globalization have made them consider
health risks connected to foreign food and to the fact, that we travel more and foreign food
31
appears more often in Danish supermarkets. We want them to define if health risks are a constant
scary food indicator in their lives or if it only exists when travelling. The last culturally learnt
dimensions is stated as following; “I find food from other cultures scary, because it affect my
ethical beliefs about what is right or wrong to eat” and in relation to globalization we ask, if
globalization has affected their ethical beliefs and emotions connected to foreign food. We want
to discuss if they are willing to try foreign food, if they find it ethical wrong or if the frequent
encounters with foreign food has made it more accepted.
In the end we will let them define which of the five dimensions they found the scariest. This is,
because we want to see if they are able to agree or disagree to the same statement and if they
have radical changes from the worksheet to the focus groups interview.
4.3.
Illustrations
Up until now we have not used any pictures of food. We have not used pictures because of two
reasons: We want to see if the interviewees perceive the dimensions differently with and without
pictures, because illustrations can affect individuals differently and if we showed pictures in the
beginning, the interview will be less objective because we, as researchers, have selected the
pictures. This means the pictures represent the dimensions as we perceive them, but that is not
necessarily what they represent to the interviewees. They will get a sheet of paper where there
are different pictures that represent the five dimensions. Each picture represents different aspect
of the dimension, some Danish, some Asian, but to a large extent foreign food from all over the
world. Each dimension will not be named, because we do not know if the interviewees perceive
the pictures in the same way as we do. We have taken this to consideration because, as
mentioned, the interviewees do not necessarily perceive the pictures the same way as we do,
which means that the interviewees might withdraw some of their statements because they can
see, that their feelings or beliefs does not fit within the dimension. We want to use the
illustrations of the five dimensions of scary food, as a way to get the interviewees deeper into the
dimensions and what they perceive as scary food indicators. Additionally, the interviewees will
be discussing the different dimensions and rank the pictures, so we are able to see, if there are
some radical changes, when using illustrations instead of statements..This means that the
methodological approach of the FNS, the five dimensions and the five dimensions with pictures
will be alike, which make it easier for us, as researchers, to make a comparison afterwards.
32
4.4.
The use of the five dimensions of scary food with pictures
After the worksheet, defining scary food, discussing the ten statements of FNS and the five
dimensions, we want to add the pictures to the research, to see if we are able to get some deeper
perspectives of the five dimensions of scary food. During the first dimension; nutrition we have
chosen to use the food pyramid, and maybe what is opposite of the food pyramid; McDonalds
and what the fast food industry represent. We expect the interviewees to reflect on the fact that
the food can be unhealthy and if that makes it a scary food indicator. The two pictures represent
nutrition in each end of the scale. By using these pictures the interviewees will be confronted
with the consequences if we do not consider the nutrition aspect in food, and it may help them
define whether or not they perceive nutrition as scary.
During the second dimension, experimental we want to use pictures that represent an
experimental phase where you want to try unfamiliar food, which can be scary because of the
unknown. It is not easy to have one picture that represents this feeling, so we made a serial of
pictures that show the eager to try something new, the momentarily hesitation, and then the
experience – good or bad. Here the interviewees will discuss the aspect of the unknown and if it
is a scary food indicator. Furthermore they will discuss their fear towards experiments with food
– and if it is a fear they consider before trying foreign food.
33
The third dimension is aromatic qualities and visual appearance. This is about taste, texture,
smell and sight. The interviewees have to discuss whether the appearance of food can be a scary
food indicator or not. In Denmark it is normal to eat meat from a sheep or to eat an egg, but it is
not traditional to eat the head of a sheep or to eat an egg; where it has become a fetus, but in other
cultures these are traditional dishes. Furthermore sushi has become a part of what some three
generations define as a normal dish – but is this equivalent within the three generations? We
want the interviewees to discuss what make appearance scary for some three generations and
perfectly normal for others. We want the interviewees to discuss how they feel towards the
unknown, which is not necessarily a sight for the eye.
Then there is the aspect of the texture and the taste. Her we used, among others, pictures of fried
starfish, scorpions and a dish with chunks of snake. These pictures represent food which is not
normal in texture in relation to traditional Danish food, and we do not know if it taste good, but
does it make it scary? We want the interviewees to discuss how they feel towards food that are
both abnormal in texture and taste.
The fourth dimension is health risks. The pictures represent different types of food posining and
what can happen if you get a food posining. These pictures should help the interviewees to
define what health risk is and if they perceive it as a scary food indicator. We also want the
interviewees to discuss if they feel any limitations when they purhase foreign food in Denmark
or abroad, because of the fear of getting food poisening, and by that define whether or not this
aspect makes food scary.
34
The fifth dimension is culturally learnt. Within the culturally learnt dimension there are three
aspects; ethical, emotional and religion, but we only consider the ethical and emotional factor (cf
chapter 3.4 The five dimensions of scary food). We want the interviewees to discuss the different
aspects and define if they perceive one of the factors scarier than the other.
Ethical
The example used to define what unethical food can be, is a picture of a dog as Europeans see
them; as our pet, and a picture of how they perceive dogs in Asia; as a food resource. This is
used in Asian, but in western countries dogs are pets and not food (cf. chapter 1. Introduction).
We want the interviewees to discuss if food becomes a scary food indicator, if it is unethical to
eat in Denmark, but normal in other countries. The other example is battery hens and if it is
ethical wrong to eat eggs from caged hens. Then the question is; has food become scary, because
of our cultural beliefs in relation to pets; the dog, or our conscience, which say it is unethical to
buy eggs from battery hens.
35
The next aspect is emotions and it is about how an animal must die, in order for people to live.
Here we have used the hen and small chickens to represent our conscience towards the fried
chicken. We want the interviewees to discuss if they have any considerations in relation to this
dimension or if it is a natural part of life to purchase meat, without even considering that the
animal once has been alive, but is killed because people wants to eat meat.
Emotions
All together these pictures may have an effect on what the interviewees’ perceive as scary food
or maybe the pictures will help the interviewees to define what it really is, they perceive as scary
in food. Is it all about nutrition, because the interviewees wants a healthy body, or is food scary
when we wants to try something new, but do not dare because of the consequence that may arise
afterwards, or is it the aromatic qualities and visual appearance of food, that makes it scary or is
the health risk connected to food or is it cultural defined what makes food scary? The answers
for these questions are the ones we wish to explore. But because we have chosen to make focus
group interviews, we can never be fully sure that, the interviewees will discuss exactly what we
want them to. We can only hope that the interviewees bring accordance between the theories and
the things we have decided to represent.
36
5.
Analysis
Now we have defined our analytic framework and conducted the focus group interviews we are
able to analyze the data. As described in chapter 2.5. Theoretical research strategy, we use The
Food Choice Model (Furst, 1996) as our core structure of the analysis process, where the
different aspect of the focus group interviews will be use to define what the three generations
find scary. In the end we are able to define the three generations strategy in their food choice in
relation to scary food.
5.1.
Life course
As stated during the theory section (cf. chapter 3.5.1. Life course), life course is all about how
the past and present can affect your choices now and in the future. When we look at the FNS, the
past of the interviewees has affected if they agree or disagree on many of statements. Especially
the seventh statement has a close relation to the past and how people around the interviewees
have affected them in their past. The statement is “I am afraid to eat things I have never had
before”. This statement relates to the past, and how food has been tested, which influence on
what food they would be willing to taste in the present. Here we expected that the young adults
would be more willing to try new types of foods compared to the seniors. We had this
expectation because we believe that globalization of food have had a larger affect on the young
adults, because they have been growing up in a globalized world. But within the three
generations, the interviewees agree that they would try something new, and by that disagreed to
the statement. Almost all the 18 interviewees agreed in the worksheet, that they would try the
food, even if they had not been introduced to the food before.16 Although the food could be too
exotic, the young adults mentions that in some countries they eat the brain of a monkey, straight
from the monkeys head (young adults film (yf), 28:42), the same goes for the matured group,
where they all agree that they want to try it if they knew what it is (matured film (mf), 37:38),
but not if they had to taste a rat or something like that (mf, 37:50). The seniors also agreed to that
they wanted to taste it, but it also depended on how the potential food looked like (senior sound
(ss), 35:48). All in all, none of the three groups finds unfamiliar food scary.17
16
17
Appendix 1, page 58
Appendix 2, page 62, 65, 68
37
The cultural learnt indicator
Peoples relation to food will always be highly affected by their past. It could be that you perceive
food as your parents did or you can go in the other direction and disgust the type of food your
parents made. Within the group of young adults there are different opinions about the types of
food that their parents have served during the years. One state that they always got traditional
Danish food; potatoes, gravy and meat, but that does not mean that he does not want to try exotic
types of food like frogs and dogs (yf, 01:08:31). One of the young adults’ stated that her mum is
a vegetarian, because she could not live with the thought of eating an animal that has not had a
good life. This has affected the interviewee, for her the most important thing is to know, that the
animal she eats, has had a good life (yf, 01:09:26). None of the young adults stated that they
were going in the opposite direction, compared to their parent food habits. But the general goal
was, that the meat they purchased should come from animals that have had a good life.
Within the matured group there is not the same kind of thoughts about animal welfare. They had
their focus on what they found ethical correct to eat. One of them states that no matter what
happened, he would never eat a cat here in Denmark. He thinks it comes to close to his own pet
and because cats have another purpose here in Denmark (mf, 01:14:45). Another says that she do
understand their way of living and accepts the cultural differences, because if she lived in a
country where hunger was an everyday thing, the cat would be the obvious choice (mf,
01:12:39). Although, she also stated that she could never as well eat a cat in Denmark. The same
aspect is discussed between the seniors. Within this group the animal welfare is not a big issue.
Again they refer to monkey brains and the dogs, and that they believe they could not eat these
kinds of food (ss, 01:05:44). One of the seniors tells a story where she and her husband have had
a strange experience. They had bought two rabbits. They had both had rabbits as children, but
somehow it felt very wrong to eat the rabbit today. It was not because of the taste, but it just felt
very wrong, because rabbits are a common pet among children today (ss, 01:06:05). Another
tells that she had enjoyed a horse steak when she was younger. Back then it was normal to eat
horse, but she could not eat it today, because her grand children keep horses as pets (ss,
01:08:14). Both of the woman states that they have change their perception of these kinds of
food because of globalization, and the fact that people have more money, because nowadays you
do not have to eat these kinds of animals to survive, but rather enjoy them as a pet (ss, 01:08:33).
The aspect of globalization will be discussed later in the chapter. All together it can be argued
that there is a difference between the three generations. Especially the young adults notice that it
38
is animal welfare that is important to them, whereas the matured and the seniors are more keen
on what is ethical acceptable to eat here in Denmark. The young adults found the ethical aspect
second most scary and the same goes for the matured. The seniors put it as the scariest of the five
dimensions.18 But here we have to consider that the three groups almost only discussed the
ethical aspect and not their feeling about animals has to die before they can get meat on the table.
But it is one thing to discuss what is culturally right or wrong on the bases on a couple of
statements, that is why we wanted to see if the three groups had another opinion when they had
to discuss the same subject, with pictures. The young adult agrees that they would try to eat a
dog, if they were in a country where it was a traditional dish (yf, 01:28:55). On the other hand
they did not have any emotional limitation with the fact, that an animal must die to provide meat
for humans. They have been raised with the knowledge, that it is normal to kill and eat animals
(yf, 01:28:48). But in relation to their emotions, they would feel bad if their food came from a
place where the animals have been treated badly (yf, 01:29:24). When it comes to the matured
the thoughts of animal welfare is not something that they consider. None of the matured had any
emotional issues in relation to, that animals must die in order to get meat on the table; it is the
purpose of the animals (mf, 01:31:45). When it came to the ethical aspect, they would all
consider tasting dog, but they could never do it in Denmark, but they would do it in a country
where the dogs get treated as pigs does on Danish farms (mf, 01:32:05). As for the seniors, the
pictures made the perceptions a bit different. They would not try to eat a dog (ss, 01:27:25), but
when it comes to the emotional aspect, they do not entirely agree. One state that she could not
eat eggs from a battery hen (ss, 01:27:25), another says that she does not really care (ss,
01:27:37), where a third state that she always buy the ecological eggs, not because of the taste,
but of her conscience (ss, 01:27:55). When we asked the three groups to rank the pictures, the
result was not entirely the same as without pictures 19. There was no doubt between the three
groups that the emotional aspect did not have any effect on the interviewees, as long the animals
had been treated well, but in relation to the ethical aspect, this was defiantly an indicator of what
scary food is, especially between the matured and the seniors. This was also what we expected,
because the young adults have seen these types of food throughout their lives on the internet and
television, whereas the matured and seniors have had many years without these direct
information’s from the world.
18
19
Appendix 2 page 63, 66, 69
Appendix 2 page 64, 67, 70
39
Globalization has made an impact on the three groups’ perception of the cultural learnt aspect.
Here the three generations agrees that it has become more and more accepted to eat domestic
pets and this acceptance are affected by globalization through television and the internet (yf,
01:06:16, mf, 01:14:45, ss, 01:07:57). But the acceptance of other cultures tradition through
globalization is one thing, one of the young adult tells that because of the globalization he think
of Chinese food as ethical wrong, because the globalizations has made it able for us to see how
they treat their animals (yf, 01:12:46). But the group is still interesting to taste food from other
cultures, especially when they are travelling. For the matured is it one thing to accept that other
cultures eat domestic pets, but they would not try it (mf, 01:14:45) and the same goes for the
seniors (ss, 01:05:44). This means that the globalization of food has brought a larger acceptance
when it comes to eat domestic pets, but where the seniors and matured will not try it, the young
adult are more open.
Now we have discussed the first level of the food choice model, we are going to define which
factors that influences three generations to perceive some food as scary.
5.2.
Influences
5.2.1.
Ideals
Now we have discussed how our life course can affect the three generations perception of scary
food, we are going to discuss which ideals they have within their food choice. Our ideals are one
of the influences that we get exposed to in our daily life and are based on our individual beliefs.
In relation to FNS statement 8; I am very particular about the food I eat, 13 out of the 18
interviewees’ agreed to this statement. Most of the interviewees in the young adult group found
it important that their diet was healthy (yf, 29:07). Only one responds, that he does not consider
the health aspect, but rather if it taste good (yf, 29:57). In general the group thinks there is a fine
line between being in Denmark in your everyday life and when you are travelling. Among the
matured where is also agreement about considering what you eat, but with a slightly other aspect,
here they discussed they had to consider their food choice, otherwise they were in risk of getting
diabetes 2 or other health diseases (38:50). Within the group of seniors there were also
tendencies about trying to be as healthy as possible (ss, 37:35, 37:40). This means that the
40
statement in relation to nutrition has an effect on the three groups’ ideals within their food
choice. 20
Culture will influence once ideals in relation to food. One of the subjects that got discussed
within the group of young adults was whether halal slaughter is ethical correct or not (yf,
01:05:45). One of the interviewees compares halal slaughter and foie gras as the same as animal
cruelty (yf, 01:06:00). The whole group agrees that their ethical boundaries are transcend when it
come to halal slaughter and foie gras. Whereas the seniors do not care if meat is halal
slaughtered or not. Because basically they did slaughter animals the same way back in their
youth (ss, 01:24:08). This means there has been a change of how three generations perceive what
is right or wrong in relation how you kill the animal. The seniors do not let them affect by the
animal welfare as the young adults. Again it can be argued that globalization has had an effect on
how the three generations define their ideals in relation to how the animals have been
slaughtered. But influences is more than just individuals ideals, there will also be personal
factors that helps define what three generations perceive as scary food.
5.2.2.
Personal factors
As stated during the theory section (cf. chapter 3.5.2. Influences), personal factors is all about the
individuals’ personal needs and preferences connected to food, such as likes, dislikes and habits.
When we look at The Food Neophobia Scale we can see, that the interviewees have a lot of
personal preferences, when it comes to foreign food. Statement 1, “I am constantly sampling
new and different food” is in close relation to personal factors, because the interviewees have to
state, whether they are doing this. We are a bit biased, because we expected the young adults to
be more willing to try new and unfamiliar food, because globalization of food made has had a
greater impact on the young adults. Within the three generations we can see, that the young
adults are more willing to try unfamiliar food than matured and seniors. All of the six young
adults agreed to the statement,21 they said that they love to try out new food and do it as often as
possible (yf, 12:45). They believe they are more willing, than few years ago, because there are
several of Asian and China shops around them today and even supermarkets have started to
introduce us to foreign food (yf, 14:55). In relation to the matured, only three of six matured
20
21
Appendix 2, page 62, 65, 68
Appendix 1, page 57
41
agreed to the statement.22 They did this, not because they do not like to try new food, but because
they not do it all the time. The eldest generation state during the focus group, that they do like to
try new and unfamiliar food (ss, 18:51), but only two of six agreed to the statement.23 When they
come across new product they get inspired and make them want to try new things, but they are
not that comfortable around foreign food, so they are careful and often stick to what they know
(ss, 19:54). The two seniors, who agreed, said: “We love to try new and foreign food and we do it
as much as possible” (ss, 18:59). We can see a difference in the young adults and seniors, when
it comes to foreign food. Whether it is globalization or traditions they lean on, can be hard to tell,
but we are able to see, that not all of the matured and seniors are embracing foreign food as the
young adults.
Statement 2, “I do not trust new foods”, also have a close relation to personal factors. We see it
as a personal factor, because individuals have to state their attitude towards foreign food. During
this statement the interviewees are more alike. Almost all of the 18 interviewees disagreed to the
statement.24 All six young adults’ disagree to this statement,25 because they enjoy tasting
unfamiliar food, but they would like to know how to cook it, before buying it (yf, 17:50). They
are more likely to be careful when travelling outside of Denmark, but in Denmark they
completely trust products, even when bought in foreign stores (yf, 16:32). They state “you have
to try it and if you do not like it, you can always throw is away and move on” (yf, 15:49). The
matured and seniors were more alike. Four matured and four seniors disagreed to the statement.26
The one’s who agreed to the statement did this on the basis of, that they do not trust foreign food,
because they are afraid of the bacteria’s the food could contain (mf, 23:04) and they are very
particularly about the foods origin (mf, 23:35). In relation to the seniors, those who agreed with
the statement, state that they do not trust foreign food, if they do not know how to cook it. The
rest of the matured and seniors are comparable to the young adults. They like new food, but they
want to know how to cook it before buying it (ss, 24:25).
We perceive statement 3, “if I do not know what a food is, I would not try it”, as a personal
factor, because it is a personal attitude, whether you would try unfamiliar food or not. The
worksheet shows, all of the young adults disagree to the statement and three seniors and three
22 22
Appendix 1, page 57
Ibid
24
Ibid
25
Ibid
26
Ibid
23
42
matured disagree to the statement.27 But during the focus groups it is revealed, that all three
generations actually feel the same towards the statement, when they get the opportunity to
explain their choice. The young adults (yf, 19:52) and seniors (ss, 28:35) would try new and
unfamiliar food, if they know what it is and how to cook it. The matured agrees with this (mf,
26:46), but are also aware of what kind of animals it is (mf, 27:02), because they would not eat
eyes from a chicken. The interviewees are different when they relate to the statement in the
worksheet,28 but in words they basically feel the same thing.
When presenting the three generation to statement 4, “I like food from different cultures”, we
where slight biased, because we expected that the young adults would be more willing to try new
kind of foods compared to the seniors, because we believe that the globalization of food have
had a larger affect on the young adults, because they have been growing up in a globalized
world. We were soon to know, that we were wrong and that globalization may have affected all
three generations more than we first thought. Within the three generations, the interviewees are
surprisingly agreeing to that they would like to try food from different cultures, but that their
reasons where a bit different. The young adults’ believe the same type of food can be boring and
monotonous (yf, 21:07), but it also depends on the culture, because they do not believe, that you
can relate to every single culture in the world. They are more into cultures, where they eat a lot
of vegetables (yf, 22:08), but the most important factor, is the flavor of the food. The matured
find food from different cultures interesting and they like to be introduced to foreign food (mf,
31:00). Additionally, the seniors love to travel and eat other cultures traditional and local food
(ss, 30:05). We could hear that the 18 interviewees’ were quite fond of culturally different food
and this is also illustrated from the ranking of the ten statements of the FNS29.
Statement 9, “I will eat almost anything”, was actually quite surprising. Only three young
adults’ and two matured could agree to the statement, whereas five seniors could agree to the
statement.30 When they got a change to explain themselves during the focus groups, all three
generations became more alike. It could be, because they during the worksheet would not state,
that they would eat anything, because they could not explain themselves. The focus group
interviews gave them an opportunity to elaborate on the statement and 17 of the 18 interviewees
27
Appendix 1, page 57
Ibid
29
Appendix 2, page 62, 65, 68
30
Appendix 1, page 58
28
43
would actually almost eat anything, except for a few items. The young adults’ are open to new
food experiences and would eat a dog if they were in China and frogs if they went to France (yf,
33:52). They do not believe that a traditional dish could be that bad, if it has been a specialty for
several of years (yf, 36:00). The only things they would not eat are raw things, except for sushi
in Denmark (yf, 34:47). Just as the young adults, the matured would actually eat anything, except
for a few items. When travelling they would eat traditional and local food and one stated that if
she ever went to a country where they served rats she would try it, but she could not consider it
in Denmark, she would only try is as a part of the cultural experience (mf, 40:00). The seniors do
not differ from the young adults’ or matured interviewees. There were only one senior, who
would not touch any other food than Danish food. The other seniors would eat almost anything
and if they went travelling, they would also try the traditional and local dishes (ss, 39:08). Both
the young adults and the matured had statement 9 on tenth place, which means that they strongly
disagree and surprisingly the seniors placed it on first place. This may relate to globalization,
where the seniors state that they had to eat what was brought to the table, because there was
nothing else (ss, 09:50) whereas the young adults may have been raised in a kitchen where it
always was possible to find something that they liked.
The experimental indicator
Our personal factors will also affect whether or not you want to experiment with food from other
cultures. One of the young adults tells that his family had always been experimenting, which also
reflects on his desire to experiment (yf, 58:02). Another state that experimenting is what makes
the experience of food exciting (yf, 58:44). A third state that the flavors of foreign food can be
too intense, that the experience is unpleasant, but she still likes to experiment (yf, 48:19). This
means that the young adult does not think of the experimental dimension as a scary indicator.
The same goes for the matured, although they prefer to know what it is they are eating (mf,
01:00:10). As for the seniors, they are bit more cautious when it comes to experimenting. One
state that they do like to experiment, but she would always try it her selves, before serving it for
guests. Another state that he does like to experiment, but because he is alone, he does not do it
often, because he feels he has to buy so many new ingredients to make a dish, and that he will
never be able to use all of these ingredients afterwards (ss, 56:08). These statements are
44
accordance with the answers in the worksheet, 31 which shows that the interviewee does not let
their opinion affect by others. That the three generations responded as they did, was also what
we expected them to respond. We expected that globalization of food would have had a greater
impact on the young adults, because they have been introduced to new food through the
television and internet most of their lives. All the young adults agree that globalization has made
foreign food less scary, because of all the restaurants that serve food from other countries, but
also because the ingredients have become easier to purchase (yf, 49:29). The matured states that
there are more possibilities today then there were years back (mf, 01:01:02), which make them
experiment more. The same goes for the seniors, one state that there is a huge difference between
the food they got as a child and what they get today, and a larger variety (ss, 56:58). But in
general, the experimental aspect did not have a significant impact on the interviewees – with or
without the pictures. No one found it particularly scary or interesting or the opposite. In general
there was not much responds to this aspect, not even during the ranking, where no one found the
experimental dimension particularly scary or not scary.
5.2.3.
Social framework
As stated in the theory section (cf. chapter 3.5.2. Influences) social framework is based on that
individuals are influenced by people in their immediate environment. Additionally, food context
is linked to social framework, because we see the social setting as one’s social framework (cf.
chapter 3.5.2. Influences). When we look at The Food Neophobia Scale we can see, that the
interviewees are agreeing that their social framework influences them. Statement 6 “At dinner
parties I will try new food” is perceived as a social framework, because you are surrounded by
friends and maybe strangers. In this case the young adults’ and seniors are agreeing that they
would try out new food when participating at dinner parties. Young adults’ believe that you at
least should try the food, because it is the polite thing to do (yf, 26:22). Additionally, they are
inspired to taste unfamiliar food, if they see other people tasting it or are talking about the dish
(yf, 25:18). This can also be related to the experimental dimension (cf. 5.2.2. Personal factors).
The seniors’ partial agrees. They all agree that they would be influenced by others and what they
eat. They would taste the food, but they are also careful about what others like, because they
might not like it themselves (ss, 33:10). In relation to the matured, only two of six interviewees
31
Appendix 1, page 59
45
would try new food at dinner parties.32 During the focus group interview they state, that they
have become more curious about foreign food, but they would prefer more traditional food if
holding or participating in dinner parties, so everybody participating would enjoy it. But
additionally, they are willing try trust the people who cooks the food (mf, 36:05). When ranking
the ten statements of the FNS, the matured placed statement 6 on a first place, which is not
comparable to the discussing during the focus group, where they stated, that they would prefer
more traditional Danish food when participating or holding a dinner party. The ranking of the
two other groups were quite comparable to their discussion.33
We perceive statement 10 “I like to try new ethnic restaurants” as a social framework, because
we perceive going to a restaurant as a social event and a social setting. 15 of 18 interviewees
agreed on this statement,34 where all six of the young adults’ agreed. They have almost tried all
of the ethnic restaurants in Aalborg and they would revisit them or try new upcoming ethical
restaurant. But before entering an ethnic restaurant, they want to make sure, that it has not gotten
a bad smiley, because if so, they would not visit. That goes also for Danish restaurants (yf,
38:08). One of the young adults’ are being influenced by his girlfriend, because she, and as well
as he, often wants to experiment with new and culturally different food (yf, 47:33). In relation to
the matured, not all of them agreed, and the ones who agreed, they would try new ethnical
restaurant, but not necessarily the entire menu (mf, 42:30). Only one of the seniors disagreed to
the statement, because she does not completely trust foreign food, if her family or friends has not
made it. The other five seniors would find it interesting to try ethnical restaurants and use the
visit as an inspiration to their own cooking (ss, 41:57). Additionally, the seniors are agreeing
that they are influenced and inspired by their children and grandchildren, who are the ones to
introduce them to foreign food. Besides that, they also believe that they are influenced by the
new cultures, which are entering Denmark and the television, which show different types of
cooking programs and documentaries from other countries (ss, 29:10).
In general it can be argued that the three different influences do influence the three generation.
To our surprise the three generations have agreed to much more than we had expected, there is
no doubt that they find foreign food interesting, but it is their ethical beliefs that divide the three
generations, whereas the young adults not just accepts that other cultures eat domestic pets, but
32
Appendix 1, page 58
Apendix 2, page 62, 65, 68
34
Appendix 1, page 58
33
46
they also want to try it. Whereas the matured and the seniors are more reluctant, they accept it,
but they find it to scary to eat a dog or a cat and in general they would not try it. But it is one
thing to discuss whether or not they find foreign food interesting, we also need to know what it is
that makes some foreign food interesting and something scary. This aspect will be analyzed by
defining the three generations personal systems.
5.3.
Personal system
5.3.1.
Sensory perceptions
When we talk about sensory perceptions, there are not many differences in why some find food
scary, but the seniors are slight harder to scare, than young adults and mature, when it comes to
food. The young adults find the food which has a repelling sight scary (yf, 4:36), when it looks
infected or to old (yf, 4:47), when they cannot see what the food is (yf, 4:51) and when the food
appears to be fatty. The matured find food scary when it is made from animals they do not
consider as being food (cats and dogs), but it is not scary if the food is made from animals we
know (cows, chickens, sheep). One of the matured do not like it, when the food as a jello
consistence (mf, 12:37). Some of the seniors do find spicy food scary, where others find it
delicious. Besides that, the appearance of the food is not what makes it scary, unless it is tongues
(ss, 03:12) or scallops and oysters, because of their consistence (ss, 07:18). All the seniors agree
that young people are pickier and have a slight more tendency to perceive some food as scary
(ss, 09:50). The three generations are alike, when it comes to what they perceive as being scary
food. All in all, it depends on the texture and consistence.
Statement 5 “ethnic food looks to weird to eat” is taking into considerations during The Food
Choice Models sensory perception, because it deals with the fact, that foreign food can to some
people be seen as a scary food indicator. All three generations are completely alike and 15 of 18
interviewees are disagreeing when it comes to the fifth statement.35 The young adults’ agrees on
that ethnic food looks delicious and its many colors are inspiring (yf, 23:30). One girl do not
want to eat stews, because it grosses her out, that she cannot see what it consists of (yf, 24:30).
Another young adult state, that he do believe it can be a bit weird looking, because some cultures
perceive, what we call garbage, as food (heads, hoofs). He thinks it does challenges one’s eyes,
35
Appendix 1, page 57
47
but he would taste it, just to say he did it and cannot get that scary feeling towards it (yf, 24:20).
As for the young adults, one of the matured does not like foreign stews, because he cannot
always see what it is, and additionally because he does not like the colors of some of the stews
(mf, 33:08). Another state, as the young adult, that he believes it can have a strange look, but he
would not call it scary (mf, 33:37). As the young adults and matured, some of the senior
interviewees do think, some of the ethnical dishes looks a bit strange and suspicious (ss, 32:03).
But as long it is not monkey brain, they are willing to try it. One state “If we cannot see what it
is, we would have to taste it, to see whether we like it or not (ss, 32:30)” and they all agrees with
that. They were quite alike through the discussion and ranking and why agree that just because
the visual of foreign food is different from what we know, do not make it a scary food indicator.
The aromatic qualities and visual appearance indicator
We asked the 18 interviewees to agree or disagree if they perceive foreign food as scary, because
of it aromatic qualities and visual appearance and why they agreed or disagreed. During the
worksheet 15 of the 18 interviewees disagreed with the Aromatic qualities and visual appearance
dimension “food from other cultures is scary, when it visually is different from what I am used
to”.36 None of the interviewees seems to consider the appearance as a scary food indicator.
Additionally, we made them explain why this were not the case. The young adults’ started to
point out, that you probably would not try to eat something, which normally grosses you out. But
just because something is different, does not automatically makes it bad (yf, 52:50). Some also
stated, that how the dish is presented means a lot. Two of the girls do believe that unfamiliar
food can be more appetizing, if it looks appealing on the plate (yf, 53:09). They agree that
foreign dishes have a tendency to be more appealing than a Danish plate of “millionbøf” or
gravy and potatoes. They do perceive an animal heads as a bit surprising, but why not try a piece
and see if you like it (yf, 53:33). In relation to the mature, they believe it can have a different
look, but not literally scary (mf, 01:03:37). They find it more disgusting, but chicken legs or eyes
are perceived as scary food (mf, 01:03:56). One said he would probably leave a restaurant
hungry, if he got an animal’s head served, like the one on the worksheets. The matured
interviewees would perceive animal’s heads as a bit scary (mf, 01:05:00). When it comes to the
seniors, they quickly agreed on, that it is not the appearance of food they consider as a scary food
36
Appedix 1, page 59
48
indicator, but more the smell of the food (ss, 59:47). All three generations made the conversation
circle around sushi. The young adults’ perceive sushi as a visually nice dish and tasty dish. One
even said that she perceived sushi as scary food five years ago, but she today uses it as a way to
pamper herself (yf, 10:06). The matured do not consider the appearance of sushi as a scary food
indicator, but they do not like the idea of eating raw fish (mf, 30:19). The seniors were actually
more into the idea of sushi, than the matured. The all agree, like the matured, that sushi look
delicious, but they would actually like to try it (ss, 20:18). They know that they should be aware
of raw fish and that is why they have not tried it yet (ss, 20:18). They believe, that sushi is a
trend, that belongs to the young adults and they believe this, because the young adults are raised
with the concept (ss, 26:12). They do consider the aromatic qualities and visual appearance of
foreign food as scary food, the matured more than the young adults and seniors, but it is not the
scariest dimension.
The worksheet handed out before the focus groups and the discussion about the five dimensions
of scary food showed, that the interviewees are generally alike when it come the visual of foreign
food. They disagree that food from different cultures is scary, when it visually looks different
from what they are use to. But how do they feel and react, when we illustrate the five dimensions
with pictures?
All three generations were exposed to pictures, which they had to explain why they wanted to eat
or not. All 18 interviewees do not perceive fish and spices as scary food. Additionally, matured
do not perceive fast food as scary food, but the seniors does because of the health consequences
connected to fast food (ss, 01:19:45) and the young adults does because of how it looks (yf,
01:23:35). All 18 interviewees perceive the egg containing a fetus as scary food. They young
adults perceive the egg as a scary food image (yf, 01:23:10), the matured see the egg as a visual
food scare and believe it is food taken to the extremes (mf, 01:27:58) and the seniors believe the
egg is far beyond food (ss, 01:21:29). The matured do perceive sushi as scary, but they would
rather eat sushi than the egg (mf, 01:30:17). The young adults do not perceive sushi is as being
scary (yf, 01:23:29) and neither do the seniors. They think sushi look delicious and that it
actually looks like art (ss, 01:18:19). The young adults’ do believe the insects looks interesting
and they would try it, if they got the opportunity (yf, 01:23:56), but the matured and seniors
disagree. The matured perceive insects as a visual food scare (mf, 01:29:40) and the seniors do
not find the insect’s appearance appetizing (ss, 01:20:07). Again young adults’ do not perceive
49
the sheep head as scary, because they can see what it is and that makes them willing to try it (yf,
01:24:37). The matured and seniors do find it scary. The matured cannot deal with the fact, they
are supposed to eat it (mf, 01:30:17) and the seniors find the appearance to weird to eat (ss,
01:22:21). When it comes to the snake stew, there are a bit differences. The young adult boys
and matured do not see it as scary food, where the young adult girls and seniors do perceive is as
scary food. Because the young adult boys (yf, 01:23:48) and matured are able to see what the
stew consists of, they would try it and do not consider the visual as a scary food indicator (mf,
01:29:55).The young adult girls do not like the appearance of stews (yf, 01:23:48) and the
seniors would not be comfortable eating snakes (ss, 21:22:40) and the find the appearance a bit
scary (ss, 01:22:55). Additionally, during the ten statements of the FNS, the seniors stated that
they would eat almost anything, but after an illustration of what they could be presented to, they
admitted they could not eat everything.
When the 18 interviewees had to rank the pictures of the five dimensions, they were quite
similar.37 The young adults and matured had placed the visual of foreign food on a fourth place,
which means that they do not consider the visual of foreign food as scary. Seniors had a harder
time ranking the visual, because they consider four of the visual pictures scary, but not the other
four.38 So when we allowed them to divide the eight pictures they placed the insects, egg, sheep
head and the snake stew on a second place and fish, sushi, spices and fast food on a fifth place,
which means, that they actually find some visuals of foreign food quite scary. Additionally, we
are able to get a better understanding of their point of view in relation to what they perceive as
scary, when we presented illustration of the five dimensions of scary food instead of statements.
When the illustration of the aromatic qualities and visual appearance dimension was shown, the
matured found it to be more scary then earlier (mf, 01:27:07). The same goes for the seniors,
which earlier stated that they would eat everything, but then the pictures was brought to the
table, they were okay with the fish, sushi and spices, but they found the egg, insects and the
sheep scary, and they would not eat it (ss, 01:18:19). Within the group of young adults the
illustration also changed their minds (yf, 01:21:51), but in the other direction than the matured
and the seniors, which found the visual scarier with illustration, the young adults found it less
scary.39 Although they found some of the illustrations scary, like the egg, they would try eat an
37
Appendix 2, page 64, 67, 70
Appendix 2, page 70
39
Appendix 2, page 64, 67, 70
38
50
insect, where the matured and seniors would not eat an insect (yf, 01:23:56). Here we see a gap
between the three generations, where, as we expected, it is the young adults who are most keen
to try foreign food, which is accordance to how the globalization has affected the three
generation. This will be described in the section below.
We wanted to study if globalization of food has influenced three generations to perceive foreign
foods aromatic qualities and visual appearance more or less scary. All 18 interviewees agree, that
globalization of food had made the aromatic qualities and visual appearance of foreign food less
scary. They young adults do not find it as surprising as five years ago, because they know it
exist. They have heard stories, seen it on television and through the internet, which makes it less
scary to them (yf, 56:40). They believe they are more familiar to globalization, than their parents
and grandparents, because they are raised in a global world. They do believe their parents and
grandparents perceive foreign food scarier than they do, because they have experienced it in
different way. They had to travel to experience encounters with foreign food and cultures, where
the young adults have seen it through television and the internet before having a physical
contact. The young adults state, that they have had cultural encounters through their childhood
and youth, where matured and seniors were much older before their first encounter in Denmark
(yf, 57:31). The matured agrees with the young adults. They believe globalization has made
foreign food more normal and the more they see, the more normal it gets. They have seen a lot
more cultural different food in real life and through television, which makes it more normal to
them (mf, 01:06:38). Globalization has affected seniors and their perceptions of foreign foods
aromatic qualities and visual appearance. They believe globalization has affected them, so they
no longer perceive foreign food as scary as five, ten and twenty years ago. They are getting more
and more use to visual different food and are beginning to perceive it as interesting and inspiring,
but they do believe that the young adults are more likely to perceive foreign food as less scary,
than they are. The seniors state this, because the young adults have lived most of their life in a
global world and they, the seniors, are just beginning to understand the global world (ss,
01:00:01). But is the visual and aromatic aspect the only indicator of scary food or does health
and nutrition also have an effect on what the three generations perceive as being scary food?
51
5.3.2.
Health and nutrition
When the groups discussed the aspects of the nutrition dimension, there was no doubt about they
all considered nutrition – when they are in Denmark (yf, 42:48, mf, 54:38, ss, 51:20). All of the
interviewees had a general opinion that nutrition is something that you consider at home, because
when you are travelling, it is for a shorter period of time, where the taste has a higher priority.
Although it is general agreed that the nutrition dimension is important when they are in
Denmark, only the young adults has agreed to the nutrition statement in the worksheet, where
four out of six have responded they agree, whereas only one in both the matured group and one
in the senior group has agreed to the statement.40 The reason why there is this difference
between what they have answered in the worksheet and what they state in the interviews might
be because the matured and the seniors mostly talked about nutrition in Denmark during the
interview and not so much about the nutritional aspect with from other cultures. All the three
groups ranked the nutrition statement as the least scary indicator of scary food.41 This makes
good sense when all the groups state that they do consider nutrition when they are in Denmark,
but do not consider it as a scary food indicator when it comes to travelling, because it is often for
a shorter period of time. But then the illustrations of the five dimensions of scary food change
their minds. The young adult had ranked nutrition as the second scariest indicator of scary food,
the seniors had is as their first scariest indicator of scary food and the matured had is as their
third scariest indicator. This means that the pictures really changed their mind of perception of
scary food. We believe that the sudden change appears because the interviewees went from
discussing the differences between being at home and travelling to a discussion about what can
happen if you do not consider nutrition at all. When we consider how the interviewees relate to
nutrition and globalization they agree that globalization has had an impact on how we perceive
nutrition as a scary food indicator (yf, 44:40, mf, 55:47, ss, 52:41). This is in accordance to how
they reacted to the pictures. It becomes a scary food indicator, because they are able to see,
through the internet and television, what the fast food industry do to people when they do not
consider nutrition.
The other factor within the personal system is health. The three groups generally agree that they
do consider how their food is prepared when they are travelling (yf, 58:50, mf, 01:09:09, ss,
01:02:40). When we look at how they ranked the statement of the health risk dimension there
40
41
Appendix 1, page 59
Appendix 2, page 63, 66, 69
52
was no doubt that health risk is a scary food indicator. Both the young adults and the matured
found the health risk dimension as the scariest indicator of scary food and the seniors as the
second most.42 Almost the same happened when they were to rank the dimensions with pictures.
The young adults and the matured found health risk as the scariest indicator whereas the seniors
had it as their third scariest.43 Although the groups ranked health risk this high, they still would
try other cultures food when they travel and here in Denmark. One of the matured states that
even it had happened a few times that foreign food had left him by the toilet, but it did not mean
he would not try it again (mf, 01:26:15) and one of the young adults state that it is a part of
travelling, so it is scary, but with the medicine we have, which can help if it happens, then the
scariness gets overruled by interest (yf, 01:02:07). In relation to globalization one of the young
adult states that she does not believe it is globalization that has made us aware of health issue
connected to foreign food or countries, but it is the media who has, to an extreme extent, made us
aware of the health risks connected to travelling and eating food in foreign countries. But when it
comes to foreign food in Denmark she completely trust the Danish Veterinary and Food
Administration because if a restaurant has hygiene problems they would make the guest aware of
the problem though the “smiley ordning” (01:01:40). Another of the young adults state that
because of globalization and all those television programs about food, we see how restaurants are
handling and storing food, which make him consider his health when he is travelling, but on the
other hand, these television programs also provide restaurants with the knowledge about what
can happen if they do not consider their handling and storing of food (yf, 01:04:29). Also the
matured group found that globalization has had an impact on how they perceive food. One
mentions the cucumber crisis44 and how the media has affected Three generations not to buy
cucumbers. If it had not been for the media and by that globalization, this case would probably
not have gotten this big (mf, 01:10:40). Altogether there is no doubt that the three groups find the
thought of getting a food poisoning scary, but that does not mean that they do not want to try
food from other cultures.
42
Appendix 2, page 63, 66, 69
Appendix 2, page 64, 67, 70
44
http://nyhederne-dyn.tv2.dk/article.php/id-40423224:agurkesalg-faldet-med-70-procent.html d. 21.5.12
43
53
The secondary literature and the empirical collected data have been brought together, which
make it possible to define, if globalization of food has affected three generations perceptions of
foreign food and if it has made foreign food more or less scary. By working our way through the
food choice model we end up with a strategy, that defines one’s food choice and in relation to
this research one’s perception of what they define as scary food.
54
6.
Conclusion
The aim of the research was to see how globalization has influenced three generations reactions
to unfamiliar food. During the study we wondered, if globalization has made three generations
feel more comfortable around unfamiliar food and if Three generations perceptions of what scary
food is has changed over time and made foreign food less scary. Additionally, we wanted to
research if globalization has created a generation gap within one society.
Globalization has made an impact on the three generations. Globalization has made it more
accepted to eat domestic pets, because of globalization of the internet and television, but it is
more accepted by the young adults’, than the matured and seniors. Globalization has also made
the easier to see how animals are treated, which raise several ethical questions. Globalization has
made the three generations understand that domestic pets are seen as a food resource in some
cultures, but to taste it, is another aspect. The young adults’ are more willing to eat domestic pets
when travelling, than the matured and seniors. The matured and seniors perceive domestic pets
as family pets, which become a part of one’s household and that is why they cannot bear the
thought of eating an animal they have bonded with, which makes them perceive domestic pets
as a scary food indicator. On the other hand, the young adults do not consider the aspect of
eating a domestic pet as being scary, but it is the animal welfare they have in mind, when
defining foreign food as a scary food indicator. Another aspect to globalization and ethical
issues are how animals are slaughtered. The young adults see halal slaughtering as animal
cruelty, where the seniors state it is perfectly normal, because of their backgrounds.
Globalization has affected the three generations more than first thought. They perceive foreign
food as exciting and inspiring and during the analysis we saw, that the three generations are
interested in new food and it does not scare them, that it is culturally different from what they
know. They would almost try eating anything and they do not perceive food as scary, if they are
able to see what the dish consist of. Globalization of food has made foreign food more
acceptable, than just a few years ago, because it has become more normal to see it in Danish
supermarkets and in restaurants. The research showed that, the seniors are more affected by
globalization, because they can see a broader difference in the food they eat now and what they
had as children and young adults.
55
Globalization of food has made the aromatic qualities and visual appearance of foreign food less
scary for the three generations. They believe it has become more normal to see cultural different
food and is has become less scary because of the television and stories about foreign food. The
young adults believe the seniors perceive foreign food as scarier than they do, because the
seniors have been brought up in a world without the internet and global television, which means
they have to adapt more to the global world and see new types of food, whereas the young adults
have been raised in a global world, where food from other cultures is normal. The research
showed, that globalization has affected seniors to perceive foreign food as less scary in the last
five, ten twenty years, but as the young adults stated, the seniors believe they are more likely to
find foreign food scary, because the young adults have lived most of their life in a global world
and the seniors are just beginning to adjust to a global world. The three generations do perceive
some foreign food as weird looking, but that does not make the appearance of food a scary food
indicator. But even though, the three generations stated that they do not find appearance as a
scary food indicator. Additionally, there were some changes of how they perceived the
appearance of food when discussing the dimension aromatic qualities and visual appearance,
based on statements compared to pictures. The seniors stated during the statements, that they
wanted to eat almost everything, but with the illustration, they actually where the ones who
found the visual aspect the scariest. In general we can see that there is a generation gap between
the three groups, when it comes to the visual aspect of foreign food.
Globalization has had an impact on how the three generations perceive nutrition as a scary food
indicator. It has become a scary food indicator, because the three generations are seeing more
and more people who are suffering from the consequences of fast food. In relation to health
issues, globalization has not made the three generations more aware of the health risks connected
to foreign food, but it is one of the scariest scary food indicators, because it is not something they
can control themselves. The three generations stated that food poisoning is an unpleasant
experience and they rank it as one of the scariest scary food indicators. Although, this does not
make them stop trying foreign food, because they believe we have the medical resources to
prevent diseases connected to food, which means that this scary food indicator gets overruled by
their interests of exploring new food.
All in all, we can conclude the globalization of food has an impact on how the three generations
perceive unfamiliar food and when they perceive food as scary. There is no doubt, that
56
globalization has influenced the three generations perceptions of food, but it is clear that the
young adults are more in accordance with the food of the global world, as it is today, than the
seniors. On the other hand, within the three generation it is the same aspects that indicate what
they define as scary food.
57
6.1.
7.1 Appendix 1
Alder
Krydset med: Mad fobi - 1. Jeg prøver hele tiden nyt og anderledes mad
Enig
Uenig
I alt
23-30 år
6
0
6
50-60 år
3
3
6
75+ år
2
4
6
11
7
18
Uenig
I alt
I alt
Alder
Krydset med: Mad fobi - 2. Jeg stoler ikke på nye fødevarer
Enig
23-30 år
0
6
6
50-60 år
2
4
6
75+ år
2
4
6
I alt
4
14
18
Alder
Krydset med: Mad fobi - 3. Hvis jeg ikke ved, hvad en fødevare er, vil jeg ikke prøve det
Enig
Uenig
I alt
23-30 år
1
5
6
50-60 år
3
3
6
75+ år
3
3
6
I alt
7
11
18
Alder
Krydset med: Mad fobi - 4. Jeg kan godt lide mad fra forskellige kulturer
Enig
Uenig
I alt
23-30 år
6
0
6
50-60 år
5
1
6
75+ år
5
1
6
16
2
18
Alder
Krydset med: Mad fobi - 5. Etnisk mad ser for mærkeligt ud til at spise
Enig
Uenig
I alt
I alt
23-30 år
1
5
6
50-60 år
1
5
6
75+ år
1
5
6
58
I alt
Enig
Uenig
I alt
3
15
18
Alder
Krydset med: Mad fobi - 6. Ved middagsselskaber, vil jeg gerne afprøve nye fødevarer
Enig
Uenig
I alt
23-30 år
6
0
6
50-60 år
2
4
6
75+ år
5
1
6
13
5
18
I alt
Alder
Krydset med: Mad fobi - 7. Jeg er bange for at spise mad, som jeg aldrig har prøvet før
Enig
Uenig
I alt
23-30 år
0
6
6
50-60 år
0
6
6
75+ år
2
4
6
I alt
2
16
18
Alder
Krydset med: Mad fobi - 8. Jeg tænker meget over de fødevarer, som jeg spiser
Enig
Uenig
I alt
23-30 år
5
1
6
50-60 år
4
2
6
75+ år
4
2
6
13
5
18
Alder
Krydset med: Mad fobi - 9. Jeg vil spise nærmest hvad som helst
Enig
Uenig
I alt
I alt
23-30 år
3
3
6
50-60 år
2
4
6
75+ år
5
1
6
10
8
18
I alt
Alder
Krydset med: Mad fobi - 10. Jeg vil gerne afprøve nye etniske restauranter
Enig
Uenig
I alt
23-30 år
6
0
6
50-60 år
4
2
6
75+ år
5
1
5
59
I alt
Enig
Uenig
I alt
15
3
17
Alder
Krydset med: Skræmmende mad - 1. Jeg synes, mad fra andre kulturer er skræmmende, hvis jeg
ikke ved om det er sundt og ernærende.
Enig
Uenig
I alt
23-30 år
4
2
6
50-60 år
1
5
6
75+ år
1
5
6
I alt
6
12
18
Alder
Krydset med: Skræmmende mad - 2. Jeg kan godt lide, at eksperimentere med mad fra andre
kulturer, men det kan virke skræmmende, idet jeg ikke ved om det bliver en god eller dårlig
oplevelse.
Enig
Uenig
I alt
23-30 år
5
1
6
50-60 år
3
3
6
75+ år
2
4
6
10
8
18
I alt
Alder
Krydset med: Skræmmende mad - 3. Jeg synes, at mad fra andre kulturer er skræmmende, når
det visuelt ser anderledes ud, end det jeg plejer at spise.
Enig
Uenig
I alt
23-30 år
0
6
6
50-60 år
2
4
6
75+ år
1
5
6
I alt
3
15
18
Alder
Krydset med: Skræmmende mad - 4. Jeg føler, at mad fra andre kulturer er skræmmende, da jeg
er bange for de Sundhedsmæssige konsekvenser der kan være forbundet med mad
(madforgiftning).
Enig
Uenig
I alt
23-30 år
3
3
6
50-60 år
2
4
6
75+ år
2
4
6
I alt
7
11
18
60
Alder
Krydset med: Skræmmende mad - 5. Jeg finder mad fra andre kulturer skræmmende, da det kan
påvirke min etiske opfattelse af, hvad der er rigtig og forkert at spise.
Enig
Uenig
I alt
23-30 år
0
6
6
50-60 år
2
4
6
75+ år
0
6
6
I alt
2
16
18
Alder
Krydset med: Sundhed & Ernæring Jeg synes IKKE, det her er skræmmende!
Enig
Uenig
I alt
23-30 år
0
6
6
50-60 år
0
6
6
75+ år
0
6
6
I alt
0
18
18
Alder
Krydset med: Eksperimenterende, Jeg synes IKKE, det her virker som en skræmmende mad
oplevelse!
Enig
Uenig
I alt
23-30 år
3
3
6
50-60 år
1
5
6
75+ år
2
4
6
I alt
6
12
18
Alder
Krydset med: Visuelt Jeg synes IKKE, det her ser skræmmende ud!
Enig
Uenig
I alt
23-30 år
1
5
5
50-60 år
1
5
6
75+ år
0
6
6
I alt
2
16
17
Alder
Krydset med: Sundhedsrisici Dette skræmmer mig IKKE! Øverst til venstre: Tyfus Øverst til
højre: Kolera Nederst til venstre: Madforgiftning Nederst til højre: Hepatitis A
Enig
Uenig
I alt
23-30 år
2
4
6
61
Enig
Uenig
I alt
50-60 år
0
6
6
75+ år
1
5
6
I alt
3
15
18
Alder
Krydset med: Kulturelt Dette skræmmer IKKE min opfattelse af, hvad der er etisk korrekt at
spise!
Enig
Uenig
I alt
23-30 år
4
2
6
50-60 år
1
5
6
75+ år
0
6
6
I alt
5
13
18
62
6.2.
Appendix 2
Young adults ranking the Food Neophobia Scale. The one that they agree most to is located
in the top.
63
Young Adults ranking the five dimensions of scary food. The one that they agree most to is
located in the top.
64
Young adults ranking pictures of the five dimensions of scary food. The one the find the
scariest is located in the top.
65
The matured ranking the Food Neophobia Scale. The one that they agree most to is located
in the top.
66
Matured ranking the five dimensions of scary food. The one that they agree most to is
located in the bottom.
67
The matured ranking pictures of the five dimensions of scary food. The one the find the
scariest is located in the bottom.
68
The seniors ranking the Food Neophobia Scale. The one that they agree most to is located
in the top.
69
The seniors ranking the five dimensions of scary food. The one that they agree most to is
located in the top.
70
The seniors ranking the pictures of the five dimensions of scary food. The one the find the
scariest is located in the top.
71
6.3.
7.3. Appendix 3
The worksheet
72
73
74
6.4.
7.4. Appendix 4
Transcription, young adult
What do you perceive as being scary food? (4:28)
Mia (4:36): When the appearance of food is repelling and stews.
Peter (4:47): I do not like the sight of food with mould.
Kathrine (4:51): If I cannot see what the food is.
Niels (4:56): I do not like to see bones, legs or chicken feet in my food.
Ann Kathrine (5:09): I find the health risks connected to unprepared food scary. For example in
India markets, are food is exposed to sun and high degrees over a longer period. I find it gross.
When the storage of food is different from what I know.
Jacob (5:48): I agree, if the storage, handling and preparation of food are not acceptable. I feel
the same, when it comes to “smiley ordningen”. If a place have a bad smiley, we know that the
risk of catching a disease it possible. Furthermore, food can be scary if it appears as fatty. It has
to be healthy, even though it does not look delicious.
Has globalization affected your perception of food (6:38).
Påvirket I er mere nysgerrige af mad fra andre kulturer
Niels (6:58): Yes, food from the rest of the world seems interesting, because you normally would
not eat their local food.
Kathrine (7:18): I find it inspiring. If I try foreign food I feel a desire to visit the country. For
example, if I am on a Chinese restaurant, I get the desire to go to China and get the full authentic
food experience.
Jacob (7:42): We are becoming more curious in the way we travel, because of the desire to try
unique and local food. And it has become easier and cheaper to travel. We do not get the real
authentic and cultural experience here in Denmark.
75
Peter (8:33): When travelling I want to go the small local places, where I am able to taste how
the dish should taste. We want the authentic experience. We get curious. Danish potatoes and
gravy is boring.
Niels (9:09): I am different from you guys. I have a habit to get tired of foreign food, when I am
travelling. I miss Danish food and especially rugbrød. It should develop to other countries.
Kathrine (9:36): I would rather eat exotic and different food, than traditionally Danish food.
Foreign food inspires me to wanting more.
Has globalization of food made it more or less scary (10:06)
Peter (10:14): definitely less scary. We are introduced to if more often, than a few years ago.
Ann Kathrine (10:20): We treat some of the foreign food as our own. Lasagne is from Italy and
Taco is from Mexico, but we do no longer think about is origin, because it has become a part of
our culture.
Niels (10:51): It has become global food and nydansk. Like restaurants, the write old fashioned
food about the traditionally Danish dishes.
Kathrine (10:06): About five years ago, I found sushi scary, but today I eat sushi when I want to
pamper myself.
If you have not seen the food before, do you think it is less scary now, because you have seem a
wide range of different food? (11:24)
Ann Kathrine (11:34): You are more open towards unfamiliar food and you are able to
experience it more now than some years ago. It would be scary, if we were not used to foreign
food.
The ten statements of the food neophobia scale (12:40)
1. I am constantly sampling new and different food (12:45)
Kathrine (12:50): I love to try unfamiliar food. It is an eye-opener to new cultures. And you do
not know if you like it, before you have tried it.
76
Peter (13:09): I love to try new food and do not want to try the same food twice. This also counts
for restaurants. I rarely use the same ones.
Mia (13:25): I agree, I try to vary my diet.
Niels (13:31): I agress and disagree. I try to experience more with food. I only used to eat meat,
potatoes and gravy, but now, I try to eat different and unfamiliar food. It is exiting and ones taste
buds are getting played with.
Ann Kathrine comment: I have not had gravy and patatoes sinces christmans. There is always
something new on the menu home with me.
Jacob comment: I like to try new dishes and it is more fun, but it is financially not always
possible to me. Without money, it can be hard to try out new things every day.
Ann Kathrine (14:55): There are a bigger supply today. There are several of Asian and China
shops around us. But you need to find the products in specialty store.
Peter comment: Fakta and supermarkets do actually have small Asian where you are able to find
products, which were impossible to find two years ago.
2. I don’t trust new foods (15:38)
Ann kathrine (15:49): It do not scary me. You have to try it and if you do not like it, you just
throw it away and move on.
Niels (16:02): It depends. If I look to weird and disgusting and the etiquette seem gross, I would
properly not try it. I am not a type of person who says, it looks exiting, so I better try it.
Jacob (16:32): It depends on where I buy it. When I am travelling I am a bit careful, but if I am
in a Danish supermarket I trust the products. I actually tried a new and different mushroom the
other day. It did not look delicate, but it tasted okay. And of course, there were a recipe next to
the mushroom, so I gave it a shot.
Kathrine (17:13): I do also feel safe, when I am able to by it in the stores.
Jacob (17:50): I would not have bought the mushrooms in foreign countries.
77
AK comments: If there have not been a recipe, would you have bought it?
Jacob responses: No probably not..I am also very careful when it comes to mushrooms, because
I am raised with the fact, that we need to be careful around the mushrooms in the woods,
because the can be poisonous. Then I would have found one on the internet and bought it the
next time I saw it
Peter (18:46): I actually like to get inspiration from new products, but as Jacob, I would like to
find a recipe before I buy the product.
Ann Kathrine comment: I have been tricked many times, when it comes to exotic fruit. They are
unripe when I buy them and when I come home and wait they are still unripe or ripen to fast.
Peter comment: I agree.
Mia (19:30): I agree. You need some inspiration, before using unfamiliar food.
3. If I don’t know what a food is, I won’t try it (19:39)
Ann kathrine (19:52): You just need to know how you are going to use them.
Peter comment: I agree and you have to know what it is.
Jacob (20:28) : It depends. If you have some knowledge about the product, it would not be so
scary. For example if you see a new type of sausage, which is made of three different kind of
meat you know, you would definitely try it. But if you come across an unfamiliar vegetable or
fruit, you might be more careful.
4. I like foods from different cultures (20:58)
Kathrine (21:07): Danish food is a bit boring.
Mia comment: Mayby not boring, but monotonous.
Niels comment: I would say, that American food is more boring and monotonous, because it
consists of so much fat. I only use it as hangover food.
78
Peter comments: I imagine it depends on what cultures you are into. In not that crazy about
vegetarian cultures.
AK (22:08): I would chose food from cultures, where I knew the food was healthy and made
from fresh ingredients. For example in India and Thailand where they use a lot of vegetables.
Peter (22:40): I believe the flavor is important.
5. Ethnic food looks too weird to eat (23:25)
Peter 23:30): oh, I think is looks delicious. Indian food can be less attractive, but you just know it
taste good.
Kathrine (23:44): The colors in ethical food is inspiring. I like when food consists of many
colors.
AK (24:02): I would never eat a stew, where I cannot see what it consist of. I want to know what
I eat.
Jacob (24:20): In India, they make use of the whole animal. It is far from our culture, where we
perceive some of the parts from animals as waste, but they see it as gourmet. I would be a bit
strange, if you got a dish served, where you could see hoofs. You are getting challenge, but I
would probably try it anyways. Just to say, that I did it.
6. At dinner parties, I will try new foods (25:18)
Peter (25:25): I would give it a chance and when you see other people eat it with joy, it gives you
a desire to try it.
Jacob (25:52): If you are at a dinner party with buffet, people usually talk about the food and
what the different dishes are. But I truly have confidence in the people who have made the food.
Kathrine (26:22): I am raised with the fact that it is polite to taste the food people have made
especially for you. And again, I do not know, if I like it, until I have tasted it.
79
7. I am afraid to eat things I have never had before (27:41) + LILLA
Peter (27:48): I perceive it as a positive thing, if I have not tried a dish before. It is exciting and
that is what makes it delicious.
Niels (28:19): If I am introduced to feet’s, heads or something like that, I would eat it, because I
see it as a bacterium.
Peter (28:42): It can get to exotic. In some countries they eat a monkey’s brain straight from the
monkeys head. That is too exotic to me.
All participants agree with Peter.
8. I am very particular about the foods I eat (29:07)
AK (29:17): I consider if it is healthy, but no, not otherwise.
Kathrine (29:36): It depends on the context. If I am in Denmark, I do think about it, allot, but
when I am travelling I do not think about it. I just want to enjoy the moment and eat what they
eat.
Peter (29:57) It does not matter to me; I just want the food to taste good.
Jacob (30:04): I believe it is important, that you find a nice balance between a healthy and
unhealthy diet.
9. I will eat almost anything (33:35)
Mia (33:44). I would eat many things, just as long as I can see what it is.
AK (33:52): I am open to try new things. If I am in China I would eat a dog and if I am in France
I would eat frog’s leg. If I know what the food is, I would eat it.
Niels (34:47): I would eat anything, just as long as is it not raw.
Kathrine (34:50): I would never eat insects.
80
Peter comments: It should be delicious
Kathrine comments back: I detests bugs, so just the thought of eating them is scary.
Ann Kathrine comments: Like in the TV program Robinson, there were going to eat insects. It
was a bit dicgusting, but I would do it. You have to be open towards new experiences.
Jacob (36:00) If the dish have been a specialty for a long period of time, it cannot be that bad. If
you are in China and do not eat what they eat, who is then the weird one? It is worth trying.
10. I like to try new ethnic restaurants (37:07)
Niels (37:30): I have tried several of ethical restaurants and it do not scary me.
Kathrine (37:48): The look of frontage and entrance means a lot to me. If it does not look
appealing, I would consider staying away, because of hygiene issues.
Jacob (38:08): I would be careful, if the restaurant has a bad smiley.
Ann Kathrine comments: I agree. If it has I happy smiley, why would not you try it.
Ranking of the ten statement of the FNS (39:00)
The one they can relate themselves to is placed on top and the one the least can relate to is in the
bottom.
The five dimensions of scary food
The first dimension of scary food, nutrition (42:43)
Jacob (42:48): It depends on the context. On holidays you do not have to consider the aspect of
nutrition as much as when you are back in Denmark.
All participants agree with Jacob
81
Peter (43:09): If you have to spend a lot of money in an ethical restaurant I Denmark, the most
important factor of the food is that it has to taste good and not whether it is nutritious or healthy.
Kathrine (43:36): if I were in a country for a longer period of time, I would probably not eat fast
food every day.
Jacob comment: There is a big difference in, if you are on a 7 day holiday or away for a longer
period. In a longer period, the place becomes your lifestyle and a part of your daily life.
Niels (44:10): During weekdays I feel the food have to be nutritious and it is okay if the food is
more innutritious in weekends.
The first dimension of scary food, nutrition & globalization (44:33)
Ann Kathrine (44:40): It has certainly made us more aware of nutrition. It seems like Danish
food is deprioritized in contrast to foreign food. Foreign food is more nutritious than Danish
food.
Kathrine comment: Indian food is more healthy and nutritious, because they use brown rise and
several vegetables.
Peter comment: Foreigners are also better at serving vegetables and making vegetables taste
good.
The second dimension of scary food, experimental (47:28)
Peter (47:33): Once my girlfriend and I bought Indian ingredients and we experimented with a
dish we tasted in a restaurant. The dish we made was inedible. We were a careful around new
dishes some timer after the experience, but we are still experimenting with food.
Ann Kathrine (48:19): The flavors of foreign can be so intense, that it is almost unpleasant.
Mia (48:30): It can be a scary thought, but not so much that I would not eat it.
82
Jacob (48:44): But is it not also what makes the experience existing? It is interesting to see if
you are able to eat it and if you enjoy the taste. That is exactly the reason to way you want to try
out new dishes.
The second dimension of scary food, experimental & + globalization (49:24)
Ann Kathrine (49:29): I believe so, because we are now able to buy foreign food in Denmark
without any problems.
Kathrine (49:46): There are opening more and more foreign restaurants in Demark, which are
creating inspirations to our daily life.
Niels (52:43): I believe, that Denmark are more open towards other cultures, than countries like
France and Italy. You do not see allot of foreign food in these countries, but only their own.
The third dimension of scary food, aromatic qualities and visual appearance (52:45)
Peter (52:50): If you can see something in the dish, you normally consider gross, you properly
would not eat it. But just because something is different, does not make it bad.
Kathrine 53:09: How a dish is plated means allot. If an unfamiliar dish looks appetizing, it can be
more appealing to eat it.
Jacob (53:33): Indian dishes are very colorful, which is more appetizing than a Danish
millionbøf. And an animal’s head would properly be surprising and you would maybe reconsider
your choice. It seems weird, but why not try it.
The third dimension of scary food, aromatic qualities and visual appearance & globalization
(56:35)
Jacob (56:40(: The sight of an unfamiliar dish is no longer as surprising as it was five years ago.
We often know it exist, because we have seen it in the television, on the internet and we have
heard stories about it, which have affected us, so we no longer perceive is as scary.
83
Kathrine comments: Is has become more acceptable than it used to.
Ann Kathrine (57:31): I imagine when our parents where younger they perceived it more scary
than us. They experienced these dishes when they travelled and had close encounters with
cultural different dishes. They have experienced the real thing and we have seen it through TV
and the internet.
Peter comments: It properly originates from our childhood.
Jacob agrees with Peter and the differences there a between generations.
The fourth dimension of scary food, health risk (58:45)
Kathrine (58:50): I consider the appearance of the food and how it is prepared. In foreign
countries they have small street shops and restaurant, which I would take a closer look at, before
buying anything from them.
Jacob comments: What about the fish “Fugo”? Just one single cutting mistake and you can
become life-threatening ill.
Kathrine responses: I would properly not eat sushi in foreign countries. I know, you have to be
careful about sushi and raw food.
Peter (01.00.00): I think you are aware of the appearance and how the food is stored.
The fourth dimension of scary food, Health risk, and globalization (01:01:40)
Ann Kathrine (01:02:07): The media affects me more than the globalization, when it comes to
health. The media is to the extreme pointing out that we have to remember vaccines, before
travelling to avoid all the world’s diseases. It is quite an eye-opener and if they were not telling
me these things, I would not thing about it. I believe, when you travel you are embracing the
culture and food as a part of the experience. When it comes to foreign food in Denmark, I
completely trust the Danish Veterinary and Food Administration. We know, if a restaurant has
hygiene problems, they are going to close it, until they have solved the problem.
84
Niels (01:04:29): We see a lot of TV programs about food and how people are handling and
storing food in a wrong and unhygienic ways. , I believe these TV programs are an eye-opener to
restaurant about they have to consider some issues, if they want success in Denmark.
The fifth dimension of scary food, culturally learnt (01:05:22)
Ann Kathrine (01:05:45): I cannot stand halal slaughter.
Peter (01: 06:00): I consider foi gras as animal cruelty.
Jacob (01:06:16): In Denmark you would not eat a dog, but in China they perceive it as a
delicacy. It took me years to realize that it is okay to eat a dog. It is an ambivalent feeling.
Personally, I feel that I have transcends barriers in the last couple of years, when it comes to
ethics about food. I do not know a lot about halal slaughtering and I really do not want to. It
sounds horrible.
Ann Kathrine comments: Halal slaughter affects me a lot.
Niels (01:08:31): I was not raised to eat anything else than the usual Danish traditional food, but
I would not mind eating frogs or dogs. There is not much, which affects me ethics in relation to
animals as food.
Kathrine (01:09:26): My mom is a vegetarian and she considers what horrible lives some
animals are going through. It has affected me, because I feel the most important thing is to know,
that the animals had a good life and did not suffer when killed.
Peter agree with Kathrine and comments: My ethics boundaries is transcend, when animals are
not treated humane.
Mia comments: I agree I need to know, that the animals are treated in a good way.
The fifth dimension of food, culturally learnt, & globalization (01:12:08)
Jacob mentions that globalization has given him an ambivalent feeling about food ethics. Once
he believed is way wrong to eat dogs or any domestic pets, but now he knows, that it is a
tradition in some countries, he does not see it as a major problem anymore (01:06:16).
85
Peter (01:12:46): I see Chinese food as ethical wrong, because they do not always threat animals
well. But again globalization has given some ambivalent feelings, as Jacob said. It is wrong to
treat animals with cruelty just because they only perceive them as being food, but I would
probably still eat it.
Ranking of the five dimensions of scary food (01:13:00)
The five dimensions of scary food connected to pictures (01:15:30)
The first dimension of scary food, nutrition (01:15:43)
Picture 1 & 2, nutrition pyramid & fast food pyramid (01:15:54)
Some of the interviewees, especially the girls, perceive all of the pictures as scary except the
nutrition pyramid (01:15:56). Mia and Ann Kathrine would only touch the nutrition pyramid
(01:19:00). The interviewees feel, that are raised to eat nutritious food in the weekdays and only
fast food during the weekends (01:17:28).
Picture 3, boy eating at MC Donald’s (01:17:38):
The interviewees believe this is a scary food moment. They are chocked by the fact, that this is a
worldwide problem and people let themselves and their children go so far (01:17:40). They
perceive fast food chains like MC Donald’s and Burger King as scary food. The state, that they
believe MC Donald’s is a negative development of globalization (01:18:06) and especially the
part where MC Donald’s are opening shops in poor countries as Africa. They have heard the
poorest population of Africa has problems with obesity, because fast food is the only food they
can afford (01:18:22). The actually believe it can be good thing, that fast food in Denmark are
pricey (01:18:35).
The second dimension of scary food, experimental (01:19:40)
Picture 1, lady eating “surstrømning”, while holding her nose (01:19:45)
86
The interviewees are asking what the picture shows, not only the unpleasant food, but what the
lady on the picture is eating. When Kathrine knows it is “surstrømning”, a Swedish dish, she
says she would not eat it, because she has heard bad things about it (01:2012). Niels just thought
it was an open sandwich with all kinds of filling and he agreed that it was not a scary moment
during the worksheet, but now that he knows it is “surstrømning”, he would not have agreed to
the fact that it was not a scary moment (01:20:23). Peter found is scary, because she held her
nose and you should not eat something that smells bad (01:20:30). They all agree, that the
probably would not eat something, where the smelling is disgusting.
Picture 2, a bad experience (01:20:47)
Peter (01:20:54): I have tried this with oysters. It was not pleasant, but I can say, that I have done
it and I am not afraid of the experience.
The third dimension of scary food, aromatic qualities and visual appearance (01:21:51)
The aromatic qualities and visual appearance I not perceived as scary food, just as long as they
know what the dish consists of. They feel it is exiting to try out new dishes (01:22:36).
None of the interviewees found the chicken egg delicious, they actually perceived is as scary
food (01:23:10). They perceive fish as delicious food, but they are careful when they are not in
Denmark (01:23:29). There are some mixed feelings connected to the stew consisting of snake
and chicken. The girls properly would not taste it, but the boys were willing to try it once
(01:23:48). Additionally, they all, except Katherine, perceive insects on a stick as interesting
food and they would like to try it sometime (01:23:56). The sheep head is visual disgusting, but
they are all willing to try it, if they were introduced to it (01:24:37). The most scaring picture is
the one of fast food. They cannot relate to people how loves fast food (01:24:14).
The fourth dimension of scary food, health risk (01:25:32)
Health risks connected to food can be scary, but the interviewees perceive is as something that
just happens and can occur everywhere. They know they are able to prevent health risks in
87
foreign countries, if they get vaccines and medicine. They are aware of the health consequences
when travelling to foreign countries, but it is a risk they are willing to take (01:25:45).
The fifth dimension of scary food, culturally learnt (01:27:36)
The interviewees are willing to a dog and they do not see it as scary food indicator (01:28:55).
They do not feel emotionally bad, because animals must die in order for humans to maintain life
(01:28:48). They are raised with the knowledge, that it is normal to kill and eat animals. They do
not perceive it as emotional consequences, that a chicken, pig, cow, et cetera, becomes food. It is
more normal for them, to eat animals and that they only lives to become human food (01:28:48).
They have some emotions connected to animals as food, if they know the meat is from a place,
where the animals are treated badly, but they would still eat it (01:29:24).
They automatically got into the fact, that globalization have not changed that animals are food,
but only made it more normal. But globalization has also affected people to become vegetarian,
vegans or having meatless days. The interviewees state this, because they feel we are more
informed about how meat is produced and how other cultures eat domestic pets or treat animals
badly. It has automatically affected our food habits and because we are able to see how it all
works through TV and the internet, it makes some people stop eating meat or specific animals
(01:29:39).
Ranking the pictures of the five dimensions of scary food (01:32:11)
88
Transcriptions matured
What do you perceive as being scary food?
Poul Erik (10:09) the things I find scary is when people eat something that I never could think of
as food; cat, dog or a rat, that is very scary. (10:23) but when they eat like for instance the sheep
head, that is not scary, because that is an animal we usually eat, just prepared in a different way.
That is just culture.
Jonna (10:50): I really need to know that it is that I eat. I will be totally lost if got to another
culture, where I did not know what they put in their food. (11:11) I think I could taste a lot of
things if I know what it is.
Lene (11:17) the same goes for me.
Bente (11:19) Me too
Jonna (11:28) if I know that it is well prepared and that I won’t get sick, then I’ll be willing to try
it. (11:56) Even if it was a rat.
Torben (12:37) I think that it is scary if the texture is to jello. I don’t like oysters and things like
that
Poul Erik (13:01) I would rather have a stew then eating oysters, because the places I come as a
tourist, this stew will be very well prepared, maybe I don’t eat it, but I am not afraid of getting
sick.
Jonna(14:15) Once in Romania, I was told that it was impolite not to taste this specialty, so I did,
but it was a very scary experience.
Poul Erik: I would rather eat something that was unhealthy or not prepared enough than eating a
spider or something like that.
Bente(16:25) but if they can do it… Torben interferes: but they have another intestinal flora then
we have. Bente agrees.
Has globalization affected your perception of food
89
Kresten(17:20) because of all the immigrants and the food they bring, our food has become more
varied..
Bente(17:35) yes is it would not have been for all of these immigrants, and then we would have
all these kinds of food that we have.
Kresten(18:30): since I was a young boy there have become many more spices on the market.
Lene interferes: there have been spices in Denmark for many years, but yes, there is a lager
variety today
Torben (19:00) But also because of all that tv about food, which has broadened my horizon.
Jonna (19:25) we have more money now then years back, so we try different restaurants because
now we can effort it
Has globalization of food made it more or less scary?
Kresten (20:09) we know a lot more about food and different cultures today, than we did years
back
Statement 1
I sample new food all of the time
Bente(21:50) we do try some new things, but not all of the time
Poul Erik (21:54) I disagree to that statement. I don’t ALWAYS try new kinds of food
Lene (22:03) I do try new food, but not all of the time.
After my husband has retired from work he has started cooking new things, that is very
interesting, because it is different compared to what I normally cook.
Statement 2:
90
I don’t trust new food
Kresten (23:04) if they are not from Denmark then I don’t trust them I am afraid of bacteria’s
and so on. In meat products there are medicine, salmonella, and bacteria’s that I don’t want.
Lene(23:35) I am very cautious if it is Danish meat or not
Statement 3
If I don’t know what the food is, then I will not try it
Bente (26:46) if it looks nice an fresh, then I would try it, but if didn’t look good I wouldn’t dare.
Kresten (27:02) It depends on what kind of animal it is, and from where on the animal, if it was
chicken eyes, then I would not try it.
Jonna (27:20) if I saw something new in the supermarket, I would research what it is and what I
can use it for, before I buy it.
Bente (27:41) I think it interesting to try new kinds of fruit, Jonna interferes: don’t you think that
its because you have tried it somewhere else, maybe on holiday, Kresten interferes: do you know
that they manure their fruits with human urine and excrements, Poul Erik interferes, will like to
taste it f its like banana where you peel of the skin
Statement 4
I like food from other cultures
Bente (29:40) I think it is interesting, but when you have been travelling, then it is nice to back to
some traditional Danish food
Poul Erik (29:55) but not sushi and things like that
Bente: 30:19) have any of you tasted sushi? I haven’t I just don’t like the idea of raw fish
Jonna (31:00) I don’t even like everything from the Danish culture, but I like to try food from
other cultures
91
Statement 5 (32:50)
Ethnic look to strange to eat
Kresten (33:08) I don’t like their stews, I can’t see what it is and I don’t like the color.
Poul erik (33:37) It can look strange, but that does not make it scary
Statement 6 (33:44)
At dinner parties, I will try new foods
Bente (33:58) if I was to serve it, then I would have tried to make it before, so that I knew if it
was good or bad.
Jonna (34:26) but I do try much more different food then I did 15 years ago
Kresten (34:32) the fact that we have gotten a fridge, has change the way that we cook and also
what we cook.
Poul erik (34:56) if was to plan a dinner party or a birthday, I would go for more traditional food,
to make sure that everybody could find something that they liked.
Bente (35:20) if I go to a dinner party, then I would try a little bit
Torben (35:23) same here
Kresten to Poul erik (35:45) so if you should plan a dinner party and somebody told you that
Russian beet soup is fantastic, then you wouldn’t trust this person? Poul Erik, well I don’t think
that a beet soup is scary, then it would have to be more special
Jonna (36:05) I went to I birthday where all the food was thai and made by a Thai. There was a
lot of different spices, and a lot I didn’t know what it was, but it was very interesting and I tried
92
it all, but I wouldn’t dare to have this kind of food to a dinner party with my family, but when I
join parties with food like that, then I think it is very interesting and try it all. And if I went to a
dinner party with foreign food, then I would trust that there wasn’t anything on that table that
didn’t taste good.
Statement 7 (37:24)
I am afraid to try new food I have never had before
(37:38) the whole group mumbles that, no, we want to try, but we need to know what it is
Kresten (37:50) although if it was a rat, then I would not taste it.
Lene and Bente (37:56) no, same here
Statement 8 (38:34)
I am very particular about the foods I eat
Jonna (38:50) I do consider what I eat, and I always take a look on the label before I buy it
especially if it something new. 39.35: I will be allowed and want to eat healthy because there is a
high chance that I get diabetes 2.
Statement 9 (40.00)
I will eat almost anything
Kresten (40:13) no no, poul erik, same here, lene, there is a few things that I will not eat
Jonna (40:30) for me it is one thing if I want to eat everything, but I think I can eat everything.
Kresten interferes: I couldn’t eat a rat. Jonna, I have already said that I would like to try to eat a
rat, but only if I was somewhere where they actually normally eat rats, because here in Denmark
it is not normal, but where it is common, then I would try because they would know how to
prepare it properly. But I wouldn’t try a scorpion soup that is over my limits.
93
Bente (41:45) I feel a bit the same, when I was in Australia I tried meat from a crocodile, but that
was only because I was there, I would try to do it myself in Denmark, but wait, I actually bought
meat from a crocodile afterwards, but that was only because I had already tried it.
Statement 10 (42:30)
I like to try new ethnic restaurants
Kresten (42:32) yes, but just because that I go to a new restaurant it doesn’t mean that I want to
try everything on the menu. Bente: If it look too gross you mean? Kresten; or if it is like brain
from a monkey or something like that.
(43:19) rangordne. Den der ligger øverst er mest rigtig om jer selv
The five dimensions
The first dimension of scary food, nutrition (54.20)
Torben (54:38) as long it isn’t a health risk, and food from other cultures will never be the main
intake, so I’m not worried about nutrition in food when it comes to food in other cultures.
Jonna (55:09) it’s like during Christmas, I eat a lot of food I would not have eaten during the rest
of the year, but because it is a short period of time, then I would be alright
The first dimension of scary food, nutrition & globalization (55.27)
Kresten (55:35) I think it is all the information that we get from the public authorities
Jonna (55:47) but the globalization has also made an impact because when I see how fat people
from the states become, then I most certainly think about nutrition. Poul Erik: yes it is really
terrible to look at those two boys on the questionnaire; I do not understand how people can end
up like that.
The second dimension of scary food, experimental (59:35)
94
Lene (01:00:00) I wouldn’t call it scary, bur exiting
Kresten (01:00:10) if I know what it is, then it is not scary. Jonna: it’s a part of travelling – to
taste food from other cultures
The second dimension of scary food, experimental & + globalization (01:00:32)
Kresten (01:01:02) I don’t think that it is because of the globalization that we eat more
vegetables today then we did 30 years back, today we have more opportunities then back then,
Bente; we are more informed today, Poul Erik; but is that not globalization? Kresten, no I don’t
think so, our surroundings have told us that it is important to eat vegetables Torben: we have
learnt that meat is the side dish not the vegetables Jonna: but it is because that the different
countries get more and more mixed up, which means that other cultures comes a lot closer and
we get inspired by each other.
The third dimension of scary food, aromatic qualities and visual appearance (01:03:25)
Torben (01:03:37) food can easily look different but not scary
Jonna (01:03:56) scary is a strong word maybe more disgusting. But if there is chicken legs and
rat tails in it, then it is scary
Kresten (01:05:00) if I was served that sheep head I would probably have left hungry, even
though that it is normal to eat sheep – just not the head, that would have been a bit scary.
Lene (01:05:12) and it is not like that I think that sushi looks scary, I just don’t like the idea of
eating it. Torben: no because sushi has nice colors, but I just don’t like the raw fish. Bente, that is
right, it looks nicer then the sheep head.
The third dimension of scary food, aromatic qualities and visual appearance & globalization
(01:05:05)
95
Torben (01:06.38) The more we see, the more normal does it get, I mean we see a lot of different
food in tv, so it just become more and more normal
Kresten (01:07:10) I would rather have something that smell good then look good
The fourth dimension of scary food, health (01:07:35)
Jonna (01:08:10) we have learnt that frozen raspberries have to be boiled before use – if its not
from my own garden.
Louise asks (01:09:00) if you are scared of food in other cultures is it because then because of
the health risk
Jonna (01:09:09) well yes, then we are back with dirty kitchen by the street, Bente but id the
guide says that we can easily eat here and there, and then I trust them
The fourth dimension of scary food, Health risk, and globalization (01:10:20)
Kresten (01:10:40) we see how people reacted on the cucumber crisis, and how people not will
buy the Spanish ones. Torben; but that was also because of the media, and how they made it as a
very big deal
Jonna (01:11:11) tells a story about how Denmark didn’t allow Spartan (kunstig sødemiddel, er I
alle light produkter), but after spain joined the European union, Denmark had to accept that spain
use Spartan, and the it would also come to Denmark.
The fifth dimension of scary food, culturally learnt (01:12:43)
Kresten (01:12:49) when we talk about mouse, rat, dogs and cats, then it is unethical to me. Poul
erik: suddenly it becomes normal to accept and eat dogs and cats – that scares me. Jonna: maybe
if I lived in a world where hunger was normal, then I think that it would be alright, but not here
in Denmark. Kresten, no matter what happened I would never eat my own cat or a cat here in
Denmark, it comes to close, that is not the purpose of the cat.
96
The fifth dimension of food, culturally learnt, & globalization (01:14:39)
Bente (01:14:45) when we see it all the time I think we become more and more adapted to the
thought of eating what we see as pets, torben: same here, Kresten, but I will still never eat a cat.
Ranking (01:16:45): mindst skræmmende I toppen
A lot of silence…
Bente (01:18:10) food poisoning – that is not good, but nutrition is not that bad
Pictures (01:20:30)
The first dimension of scary food, nutrition (01:21:27)
Bente (01:21:33) if we don’t consider the food pyramid, then it becomes scary
Jonna 012212: I think that it is so scary that kids today is raised in a world where it is so normal
to be overweight, it’s the adult who has missed out on their responsibility, they make their kids
sick from they are born. Bente: but I just don’t understand that these parents don’t know that it is
wrong: Torben: but that is the easy way, and it is tempting because of the toys.
The second dimension of scary food, experimental (01:22:56)
Bente (01:23:50) I think that I would try it if I knew what it was
Torben (01:25:23) if I saw other people eating it, then I would be tempted also to taste it. Jonna
same here.
The fourth dimension of scary food, health (01:25:52)
Kresten (01:26:15) just because that it has happened a few times, that I have had a bad stomach,
does mean that I am afraid to do it again
97
Lene (01:26:22) once I was to a party where we had oysters, where I felt bad afterwards, and I
never tried it again
The third dimension of scary food, aromatic qualities and visual appearance (01:27:07)
Poul Erik (01:27:58) that is not just culture, it is too extreme to me, so I really had to choose I
would end up with the sushi
None would try the scorpion on a stick or the chicken egg, Torben says maybe the starfish
Jonna (01:29:40) this is purely the visual aspect that scares me and I couldn’t eat the insects
either
The stew (01:29:55) most of them think that they would taste it, because they can to an extent
see what it is
Poul Erik (01:30:17) but the visual aspect does have some effect, because it should be the same
whatever part of the sheep that you eat, but I still don’t like the thought of eating the head like
this. But the sheep head is probably more healthy then the burgers and all the fast food. Lene: but
won’t eat anyways
The fifth dimension of scary food, culturally learnt (01:31:17)
(01:31:45) None of the interviewees mined that a chicken or a little pig has to die, so that they
can get food/meat on the table
(01:32:05) all of the interviewees consider the dog, and they think that they could eat it, but
never in Denmark, that would just be too wrong. Jonna if the dogs get treated like the pigs did
back on the farm, them it would be alright, because the purpose of the pigs was to eat them
Ranking the pictures (01:33:40)
The less scary in the top
98
Jonna (01:34:58) I would rather eat something that is well prepared then getting a food poisoning
99
Focus group interview, seniors
What do you perceive as scary food?
Inggol (00:52): I do not eat spicy food. But otherwise I will eat almost anything, or I am willing
to try it and when I am travelling I love to taste the local food.
Tove (01:05): Like Inggol, I do not like spicy food and I will only eat the food I know.
Britta (01:29): I do not know to any ethnical food.
Bodil comments: But you have travelled before!
Britta responses: Yes, but when I travel, I mostly eat Danish food.
Bodil, Ellen, Erling and Inggol disagree with Britta, that they eat local food, when travelling
(06:25)
Britta (02:11): But I am not afraid to try new food. I do not believe that food can scare me and I
am willing to try almost anything.
Erling (02:34): I am eating almost everything that is presented to me. I do not think any food
would scare me?!
Inggol: comments: No, food cannot scare me either.
Erling (02:46): But I do find tongues scary and I have had the feeling since I was little. I do not
think a lot about the appearance of food (03:12).
Bodil (04:11): We eat a little of everything, but I do not eat scallops and oysters. Just the sight
and consistence of them scares me (07:18). I believe, that you cannot say that you do not the
food, if you have not tried it. When me and my husband travels, we always eat the local food and
I think it is fun and inspiring to try new dishes.
Inggol (08:33): I actually like snails and octopus.
Ellen (09:12): I would eat almost anything once, but I do not touch shellfish. I Love spicy food.
All six seniors believe young people are more picky (09:50).
100
Has globalization affected your perception of food (12:42)
They are all agreeing on, globalization of food has made Three generations more curious about
foreign food (12:49)
Bodil (12:56): We did not eat the food we eat today just fifteen years ago. We did not know
about burgers, pizza or fries, when we were young. Today’s food is not like the food we knew
ten, twenty or thirty years ago. We eat more vegetables today, than we did ten years ago (14:52).
Inggol comments (13:25): Even a fish is fried in a different way
Ellen (13:34): We are highly affected by the cultures, which are entering Denmark and we do see
a lot of food and foreign food on TV. It was more popular with TV cooking shows in our time,
where you actually saw how to cook food and not is was nothing like today, where it is seen as
entertaining.
Bodil comments: Yes is has changed a lot. We are several influences today. It is nothing like the
time where we were young.
Tove (13:48): I cannot keep up with the developments and I do stick to Danish food, because I
cannot relate to foreign food.
Ellen comments: I do also mostly eat Danish food, but I like to try new types of food.
Bodil: we eat a whole lot of vegetables today, than we did just three years ago. The developing is
fast. A traditional boiled potato is a bit boring.
Erling agrees, but do not believe a boiled potato is boring. He could not live without it.
Bodil (16:04): Even words have changed. When we were young, we called potatoes with skin:
“med pillen på”, but today young people, even my own children, do not know what that means.
Has globalization of food made it more or less scary? (16:20)
Inggol (16:32): I believe it has become scarier.
Ellen comments: No, I think is has become less scary. It is exiting.
101
Britta: no, not more scary. It is interesting.
Bodil comments: It is existing with new dishes and new inspiration.
Inggol responses: I think is getting to close
Bodil (16:56): I believe Kurdish food is so good and inspiring, but to fatty.
The ten statements of the food neophobia scale (18:20)
1. I am constantly sampling new and different food (18:51)
Bodil (18:59): We love to try our new and foreign food. We do it almost once a week.
Erling (19:05): Not all the time, but as much as possible.
Tove (19:16): I do not want to try new or foreign food.
Britta (19:19): If you come across a new recipe or a new product, it makes me want to try it.
Tove (19:54): I do feel comfortable with foreign food.
Inggol (20:19): We do not consider some food as lasagna or spaghetti with meat balls as foreign
food. It has become a part of the Danish culture.
Britta (20:33): When you hear the word ethnic food, we think of lamb and food like that.
Bodil comments: Yes, it is easy to doubt whether food is Danish or from a foreign culture. Our
son lives in Poland, so we are often eating traditional Polish food. On Christmas Eve we eat
twelve different kinds of fish, one fish for each month. It is a bit strange, but is taste delicious.
Once we tasted wild boar, it was so good.
2. I don’t trust new foods (22:20)
Inggol (22:30): I try to avoid food if I do not know what to do with it.
Britta: I agree.
102
Ellen (24:25): If I see some food that looks interesting, I am going to figure out how to use it. If I
can get an employee to tell me about the food and how to cook it, I would definitely try it. If I
can get any help, I will not by it.
Bodil (24:32) I would try it, if is looks nice. I get inspired, if I see some unfamiliar food with an
appertaining recipe.
The all agree sushi looks good, but there are some disagreements in, whether they feel the need
to try it. Ellen is not a fan of fish, so she would be careful with raw fish (20:18). They conclude
that sushi is a younger trend and they believe it is because they are raised with the concept
(26:12).
Britta (26:24): I want to know what I am buying, if I cannot see what the food is, I will not buy
it.
.
3. If I don’t know what a food is, I won’t try it (28:35)
They agree on, that they are not afraid to try food, even though they do not know what it is. If
they are introduced to it in a foreign country or Denmark, they would be willing to try (28:58).
They are getting inspiration from their children and grandchildren. They introduce different
kinds of food and this give inspiration to further experiences with food. Besides that, some of the
interviewees are getting inspired by the television and several TV cooking programs (29:10).
4. I like foods from different cultures (30:05)
They all agree that they like food from foreign countries.
Inggol (30:12): When you travel you want to taste the local food.
Bodil (31:10): We are actually eating a lot of Thailand’s and Vietnamese fish.
5. Ethnic food looks too weird to eat (31:58)
Bodil (32:03): Yes, some it does, but not all of it. Just as long as it is not monkey brain.
103
Ellen (32:16): I agree some look a bit suspicious.
Britta (32:30): If we cannot see what it is, we will have to taste it, to see whether we like it or
not.
Inggol (32:46): No, not all ethnic food looks delicious, but like Bodil said, we would have to
taste it.
6. At dinner parties, I will try new foods (33:10)
Britta (33:20): Yes of course. We do get influenced. If our neighbor just told us, that something
taste delicious we would have to try it.
Bodil (33:25): Yes and no. I do not always trust what others perceive as good food. I would not
always try something other tells me is good, because I do not trust all types of food.
They do agree that other people are able to influence one to try some food.
7. I am afraid to eat things I have never had before (35:54)
They all agree that they would not be scared to eat something, they had never tried before. They
just want to know what it is.
Bodil (36:55): It depends on the collation. If it looks good, we are more inclined to taste it.
The rest agree
8. I am very particular about the foods I eat (37:15)
Inggol (37:20): No not really.
Ellen (37:35): Yes, to a high degree.
Bodil (37:30): We try to avoid to fatty food.
They perceive the same whether they eat Danish or foreign food.
104
Bodil (38:33): Foreign food does consist of a lot more vegetables than Danish food. We are
getting used to eating more vegetables, than we did a couple of years ago.
Ellen (38:38): I agree. We are using more vegetables than we did ten or fifteen years ago.
9. I will eat almost anything (39:08)
All participants, except Tove, would almost eat anything, just to try it once.
They believe the time has change and the prices of food like fish has developed in the same
direction. They know it is, because more and more want to eat fish (39:35).
10. I like to try new ethnic restaurants (41:57)
They would all like to try out new ethnic restaurants, except Tove. She do not trust the food
completely, when she or someone she knows have not made it. The others find it existing to try
new food and they perceive it as inspiration to their own dishes.
Ranking of the ten statements of the food neophobia scale (43:38)
The first dimension of scary food, nutrition (51:13)
Bodil (51:20) not if it’s just one meal, but if it is for a longer period of time, would consider
nutritional aspect in my food.
Ellen (51:53) if it is for a shorter period of time I don’t think about, its more the taste of it
The first dimension of scary food, nutrition & globalization (52:24)
Ellen (52:33) hasn’t it always been like that
Inggoll (52:35) I don’t consider nutrition
105
Bodil (52:41) I do get scared when I look at people that are really unhealthy fat, and what they
put in their mouth. Inggoll: but why do you care? Britta: what they put in their mouth is not
nutritional correct. Bodil, if we didn’t consider nutrition, then we would be too fat
Tove (53:38) I think that we consider what we eat compared to that the youth eat, we shake our
heads when you go and get a pizza. Bodil, hmm, I like to get pizza sometimes, especially when I
am with my kids and grand kids
Erling (54:00) I think it taste good
Bodil (54:22) such a fish burger from McD taste good
Tove (54:33) hmm now we are the unhealthy ones anyways
Bodil (54:38) from time to time we go to McD. Tove: I don’t
The second dimension of scary food, experimental (55:15)
Inggoll (55:34) I wouldn’t dare
Bodil (55:36) if I am going to try new food, I always try it out without any guest
Inggoll (56:08) I would like to be more experimental, but when I am cooking for one, it is a lot
of ingredients, so I would prefer to experiment, but I don’t do it.
Britta (56:25) I would consider if I dared to eat for instance meat which has been hanging for a
long time when I am travelling, because I do not know where it has been or if it has been kept
responsibly.
The second dimension of scary food, experimental & globalization (56:48)
Bodil (56:58) there is a huge difference between what we got years ago compared to today.
Ellen, Tove and Britta agree. Bodil, it was the same things that we had every week: Ellen
meatball two times a week, stegt flæsk ones. Bodil: we got chicken on Sunday, because that was
not a everyday kind of food.
106
The third dimension of scary food, aromatic qualities and visual appearance (58:49)
Ellen (59:06) the smell can have a strong effect on me.
All (59:47) the sight is not important, but the smell is
The third dimension of scary food, aromatic qualities and visual appearance & globalization
(01:00:01)
All (01:00:05) Yes, and it is very interesting with all that new food. We can see, that the young
people are less scared by foreign food than we are.
Louise (01:00:40) now that you are all retired, has that given you more time to experiment in?
All: No, we are so busy, Bodil; I think it is because I enjoin to cook also new types of food, we
have more time to make food that needs to be prepared for a long time (simre mad)
Inggoll: the economical aspect has also had a large influence
The fourth dimension of scary food, health (01:02:13)
Britta (01:02:40) I do consider what I eat when I am travelling. Inggoll: their stomachs are use to
their food and not the other way around
All (01:02:52) it is more scary when it is foreign food then when it is Danish
The fourth dimension of scary food, Health risk, and globalization (01:03:07)
Britta (01:03:22) I really do consider it when I am travelling. Everybody agrees. But we also
consider it when we are home Bodil; but we would rather experiment and do it at home. Inggoll:
and then we know how old it is. Bodil: I would rather experiment in my own kitchen then on a
restaurant. Ellen: I feel safer in my own kitchen.
107
The fifth dimension of scary food, culturally learnt (01:05:24)
Bodil and Britta (01:05:44) monkeys and dogs. Ellen; sheeps heads, that I don’t want
Tove (01:05:56) oysters, that I would never eat
Inggoll (01:06:05) it is like some people who don’t want to touch rabbits, because they are pets
Bodil (01:06:18) when we where children we have had rabbits many times, men then we bought
some a couple years back, and we had a hard time eating them. Erling: it tasted good, but it felt
wrong, cannot explain why that was.
Ellen/ Louise (01:07:24) you said that you did not like monkeys or rats – nor did you like the
sheep head. Ellen: it is not that I don’t like sheep’s, because I do, but it is visual thing and eating
the head doesn’t look nice
The fifth dimension of scary food, culturally learnt & globalization (01:07:45)
Bodil (01:07:57) more and more often we see these kinds of things, so it becomes more normal
Tove (01:08:02) but still people eat dogs, cats and guinea pigs – but that is not food, I couldn’t
eat it
Britta (01:08:14) years back people in Denmark ate horse meat, but that is not seen anymore,
because the young children have them as pets
Bodil (01:08:33) it is not that I don’t want to eat it today; it is just not possible to get
Ranking 010940, the one in the top is the that you find the least scary
Nutrition in the top,
Experimental
Sensory
Health risk
108
Culture in the bottom
Pictures
The first dimension of scary food, nutrition (01:14:06)
Inggoll (01:14:25) very scary with that fat child, Bodil: I don’t understand how the parents have
letting it get that far
Everybody (01:14:38) feels very sorry for him
Bodil (01:15:30) it doesn’t look like it is Danish children, but it could might as well be Danish
children
The second dimension of scary food, experimental (01:15:48)
Bodil 011645: a story about dry ham in norways, it wasn’t scary and they tried it. Very dry, but it
didn’t taste bad.
No reaction on the topic…
The third dimension of scary food, aromatic qualities and visual appearance (01:18:19)
Fish and sushi:
All (01:18:55) it looks very delicious, Inggoll: it almost looks like art
Spices
Bodil, Ellen and Britta (01:19:02) It looks look delicious. Tove: I don’t know them, I just use salt
and pepper.
Fast food
Bodil (01:19:45) it looks very good, but that is one thing, I know that I can’t eat too much, or
else I’ll get fat
109
All (01:19:54) it is not the appearance of the fast food, but the consequence of eating it
Scorpion, beetles on a stick
All (01:20:07) no that they can have to themselves.
The chicken
Erling (01:21:29) that is far beyond what food is. All: yes, that I wouldn’t taste
Sheep head
Tove (01:21:45) don’t they eat it in Greece? Pernille: They do in Norway.
All (01:22:21) we don’t want to eat it
Stew
Erling (01:22:40) I wouldn’t feel good about eating snakes and so on
All (01:22:55) it’s the appearance that makes us don’t want to eat it
The fourth dimension of scary food, health (01:23:26)
Britta (01:24:00) no I don’t consider it when I’m home, but when I am travelling, then I do.
Bodil (01:24:08) I went to the bazaar in Århus and bought some steaks, but I don’t consider if it
is health risk or not. Maybe they were halal slaughtered but I don’t care. Erling: it’s the same as
years back, back then we also cut the throat on the pig and that was alright.
Pernille (01:26:00) do you think there is a difference of how you and young adults approve of
that is right and wrong when it comes to buying meat?
Inggoll (01:26:10) I think there is a difference between the two groups. Ellen: I think that the
young adult do a lot more consideration about how the animal was brought up.
The fifth dimension of scary food, culturally learnt (01:27:18)
110
The little dog
All (01:27:25) no thank you. Tove: I really don’t like that thought
The chicken
Ellen (01:27:35) (the captured chicken) those I don’t want to have
Bodil (01:27:37) I must say that I don’t really care about that
Tove (01:27:55) I always buy the ecological eggs. Bodil, why is that, can you taste the
difference? Tove: no that has something to do with my conscience - it comes from inside.
The little pig
Erling (01:28:06) it’s the course of nature that is why they are here
Ranking the pictures
The fat boy and the dog and chicken in the top
Sometimes you find the appearance scary but not always (split it up)
Health is more scary than experimental
111
6.5.
7.5 Appendix 5
The Pictures for the five dimensions of scary food
Nutrition
112
Experimental
113
Health risk
114
Aromatic quality and visual appearance
115
Cultural learnt
116
7.6 Appendix 6
We have illustrated below, how we believe the ten statements of the FNS can be combined
to the five dimensions of scary food.
Nutritio
Experime
Sensory
Health
Cultural
nal
ntal
&
risks
ly learnt
perspect
perspectiv
appeara
percepti
ives
es
nce
ons
I am constantly sampling
new and different foods
X
X
I don’t trust new foods
X
X
X
X
X
X
If I don’t know what a
food is, I won’t try it
X
I like foods from different
cultures
Ethnic
X
food
looks
X
too
weird to eat
X
At dinner parties, I will
try new foods
X
X
I am afraid to eat things I
have never had before
I
am
very
X
X
X
X
X
particular
about the foods I eat
I will eat almost anything
X
X
X
X
I like to try new ethnic
restaurants
117