Skip to main content

Table 1 Descriptive characteristics (mean ± SD, frequency (%)) for the total sample and subgroups

From: Explaining the effects of a point-of-purchase nutrition-information intervention in university canteens: a structural equation modelling analysis

   

Total sample (n = 220) a

People with low knowledge and high intention (n = 70)

People with high knowledge and high intention (n = 44)

Mediator

Effect on energy intake

Mean ± SD

1.10 ± 147

−27.88 ± 132

−30.66 ± 126

 

Increase in energy intake

Frequency (%)

5

9

5

 

Maintenance of high energy intake

 

17

10

18

 

Maintenance of moderate energy intake

 

55

57

59

 

Maintenance of low or recommended energy intake

 

16

16

11

 

Decrease in energy intake

 

6

9

7

 

Effect on attitude

Mean ± SD

−0.69 ± 1.34

−0.61 ± 1.15

−0.64 ± 1.35

 

Negative change in attitude

Frequency (%)

10

7

2

 

Maintenance of low attitude

 

23

19

25

 

Maintenance of moderate attitude

 

34

40

32

 

Maintenance of high attitude

 

5

4

7

 

Positive change in attitude

 

27

30

34

 

Effect on subjective knowledge

Mean ± SD

−0.05 ± 0.94

−0.12 ± 0.99

−0.07 ± 0.71

 

Negative change in knowledge

Frequency (%)

10

11

11

 

Maintenance of low knowledge

 

11

13

9

 

Maintenance of moderate knowledge

 

23

30

14

 

Maintenance of high knowledge

 

8

6

5

 

Positive change in knowledge

 

49

40

61

 

Use of information b

Mean ± SD

2.90 ± 1.51

3.03 ± 1.47

3.21 ± 1.52

 

Never

Frequency (%)

27

24

23

 

Rarely

 

20

16

14

 

Occasionally

 

15

17

14

 

Sometimes

 

24

27

30

 

Regularly

 

10

13

16

 

Often

 

4

1

5

 

Always

 

1

1

0

 

Subjective understanding of information b

Mean ± SD

4.54 ± 1.25

4.54 ± 1.23

4.45 ± 1.17

 

Totally disagree

Frequency (%)

2

1

0

 

Disagree

 

5

3

5

 

Rather disagree

 

11

13

16

 

Neither agree, nor disagree

 

30

33

34

 

Rather agree

 

26

27

25

 

Agree

 

22

17

18

 

Totally agree

 

4

6

2

 

Objective understanding of information

Mean ± SD

10.19 ± 2.25

9.63 ± 2.29

10.32 ± 1.91

 

Liking of information b

Mean ± SD

4.35 ± 1.06

4.43 ± 1.02

4.56 ± 1.00

 

Not like at all

Frequency (%)

2

3

0

 

Moderately dislike

 

3

1

5

 

Slightly dislike

 

12

9

5

 

Neutral

 

34

34

34

 

Slightly like

 

39

41

39

 

Moderately like

 

11

11

18

 

Like very much

 

0

0

0

Moderator

Objective nutrition knowledge

Mean ± SD

9.10 ± 1.53

7.03 ± 1.65

11.92 ± 1.76

 

Intention to change diet b

Mean ± SD

4.65 ± 1.16

5.53 ± 0.63

5.44 ± 0.58

 

Very unlikely

Frequency (%)

2

0

0

 

Unlikely

 

3

0

0

 

Rather unlikely

 

9

0

0

 

Neutral

 

29

0

0

 

Rather likely

 

35

54

59

 

Likely

 

18

37

34

 

Very likely

 

4

9

7

  1. aFour individuals were removed from the sample because of incomplete information, leaving a final sample of 220 valid cases.
  2. b Distributional labels for the response categories “2”, “3”, “5”,”6” were not present on the scales at data collection, but are included in the table for clarity of presentation.