Skip to main content

Table 3 Results of the regression analysis: factors associated with frequency of using food labels

From: Determinants of Israeli consumers’ decision to use food label information more frequently: a national survey study

Explanatory variables Dependent variable: Food labels affect buying decisionb
Model 1a Model 2
OR Confidence Interval 95% OR Confidence Interval 95%
Lower Bound Upper Bound Lower Bound Upper Bound
Importance of healthy nutrition (base = Not at all/ Slightly/ Moderately)c 2.79*** 2.04 3.84 2.76*** 1.97 3.87
Confidence of using labelsb (base = Not at all/ Slightly/ Moderately)c 2.58*** 1.76 3.77 2.48*** 1.62 3.78
Responsible for shopping (base = No)d 1.55** 1.04 2.33 1.42 0.91 2.21
Benefit: food labels ensure the quality and safety of food (base = Do not agree/ In the middle)e 1.78*** 1.20 2.64 1.72** 1.12 2.64
Gender (Base = Men)     1.58** 1.05 2.39
Age group 41–60 (Base = 21–40)     0.80 0.49 1.32
Age group above 60(Base = 21–40)     1.30 0.76 2.24
Education (Base = 12 years and less)     1.32 0.86 2.04
Religion (Base = Jews)     1.72* 0.98 3.01
Marital Status (Base = non-married)     1.66** 1.057 2.61
Income (Base = average and lower than average)     1.10 0.70 1.72
  Pseudo R-Square
(Nagelkerke) = .204
Akaike’s Information Criterion (AIC) = 403.640
Pseudo R-Square
(Nagelkerke) = .236
Akaike’s Information Criterion (AIC) = 723.127
  1. *** p < 0.01, ** p < 0.05, * p < 0.1
  2. aModel 1 was adjusted for the variable “responsible for shopping”, while model 2 was adjusted for the variable “responsible for shopping”, and socio-demographic characteristics of gender, age group, education, religion, marital status and income
  3. bThe scale was 1 = Rarely/ Never, 2 = Sometimes, 3 = Almost always/ Always
  4. cThe scale was 1 = Not at all/ Slightly/ Moderately, 2 = Very much
  5. dThe scale was 0 = No, 1 = Yes
  6. eThe scale was 1 = Disagree/ In the middle, 2 = Agree