Sociodemographic, Knowledge and Attitudinal Factors Related to Meat Consumption in the U.S.
Date
Authors
Major Professor
Advisor
Committee Member
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Authors
Research Projects
Organizational Units
The Department of Economic Science was founded in 1898 to teach economic theory as a truth of industrial life, and was very much concerned with applying economics to business and industry, particularly agriculture. Between 1910 and 1967 it showed the growing influence of other social studies, such as sociology, history, and political science. Today it encompasses the majors of Agricultural Business (preparing for agricultural finance and management), Business Economics, and Economics (for advanced studies in business or economics or for careers in financing, management, insurance, etc).
History
The Department of Economic Science was founded in 1898 under the Division of Industrial Science (later College of Liberal Arts and Sciences); it became co-directed by the Division of Agriculture in 1919. In 1910 it became the Department of Economics and Political Science. In 1913 it became the Department of Applied Economics and Social Science; in 1924 it became the Department of Economics, History, and Sociology; in 1931 it became the Department of Economics and Sociology. In 1967 it became the Department of Economics, and in 2007 it became co-directed by the Colleges of Agriculture and Life Sciences, Liberal Arts and Sciences, and Business.
Dates of Existence
1898–present
Historical Names
- Department of Economic Science (1898–1910)
- Department of Economics and Political Science (1910-1913)
- Department of Applied Economics and Social Science (1913–1924)
- Department of Economics, History and Sociology (1924–1931)
- Department of Economics and Sociology (1931–1967)
Related Units
- College of Agricultural and Life Sciences (parent college)
- College of Liberal Arts and Sciences (parent college)
- College of Business (parent college)
The Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) conducts innovative public policy and economic research on agricultural, environmental, and food issues. CARD uniquely combines academic excellence with engagement and anticipatory thinking to inform and benefit society.
CARD researchers develop and apply economic theory, quantitative methods, and interdisciplinary approaches to create relevant knowledge. Communication efforts target state and federal policymakers; the research community; agricultural, food, and environmental groups; individual decision-makers; and international audiences.
Journal Issue
Is Version Of
Versions
Series
Department
Abstract
Objective
To provide information about meat consumption and factors that explain differences among subpopulations, and to evaluate how knowledge and attitudes about nutrition and awareness of diet and health influence meat consumption.
Design
The 1994–1996 Continuing Survey of Food Intakes by Individuals provided two nonconsecutive 24-hour recalls. The Diet and Health Knowledge Survey was administered at least 1 week after the last 24-hour recall. Meat subgroups (chicken, beef, pork, and processed pork products) were calculated from Food Guide Pyramid meat groups by using recipe ingredients.
Subjects
The study sample included 4,802 children and 9,460 adults from the Continuing Survey of Food Intakes by Individuals and 5,649 adults from the Diet and Health Knowledge Survey.
Statistics
Weighted percentages and means described the food intake and self-assessed dietary characteristics. Relationships among types of meat intake, dietary characteristics, and demographics were evaluated using a two-stage, multivariate regression model.
Results
Individuals in higher income households consumed relatively more chicken; those in low-income households consumed more processed pork products. Those consuming no beef and smaller amounts of chicken had the lowest discretionary fat intakes. Beef and pork consumers were more likely to think that their diets were too high in fat, but less likely to believe it is important to eat a low-fat diet. Region of residence affected the probability of consuming most meats. Having a high level of education was associated with a lower likelihood of consuming beef and pork.
Conclusions
Sociodemographic factors are strong predictors of the probability of choosing particular types of meat and of the amounts eaten. Knowledge and attitudes about diet and meat products also influence choices.
Comments
This is an article from Journal of the American Dietetic Association 105 (2005): 1266, doi: 10.1016/j.jada.2005.05.014.