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