Workplace foodservice; perception of quality and trust

In settings such as workplaces there is a growing acceptance that the food provided has a significant impact on health and wellbeing. This is a captive environment where the overall contribution of the meal served could be an important element of the overall diet and represents an under researched area. Despite growing demand, little information is available; time pressure when making food choice alongside the challenge of understanding information provided can act as barriers for healthy selection and can also decrease confidence in the food system. We would also argue that the fundamental human right of informing consumers what they are eating is not currently being addressed and is underscored. This study used focus groups to explore criteria that motivate peoples' food choice in a workplace foodservice setting. Thematic analysis was applied to categorise data according to frequently occurring responses. Data were collected from four focus groups in Germany and the UK with a total of 23 participants. Although there is little expectation in the quality of food served in the workplace, respondents valued any transparency of information and the opportunity to socialise with other work colleagues. Criteria of importance were identified as: Value for money, Variety, Naturalness, Nutrition, Portion Size, Taste, Visual Appearance, Origin, Animal welfare, Environmental impact, Fair Trade and Organic. Gaining insight into these criteria can enable operators to meet the needs and expectations of their customers in order to increase confidence in the food provided and in addition signpost a healthier selection

What are we eating? Consumer information requirement within a workplace canteen

The workplace is a captive environment where the overall contribution of the meal served could be an important element of the overall diet. Despite growing demand little information is available to aid healthy dish selection. This study identifies information valued by consumers in the UK, Greece, Denmark and France using best-worst scaling. Value for Money, Nutrition and Naturalness are key elements of information that consumers require to be able to make a conscious decision about dish selection in all four countries. Latent class analysis shows that consumers align to one of five cluster groups, i.e., Value Driven, Conventionalists, Socially Responsible, Health Conscious and Locavores. Understanding key information needs can allow food operators to align their service with consumer preferences across different market segments

The Context of Current Content Analysis of Gender Roles: An Introduction to a Special Issue

The aim of this paper is to provide context for the quantitative content analyses of gender roles that are to be included in both parts of this special issue. First, a timeline of historical uses of the content analysis methodology is presented. Second, research objectives that frequently drive content analysis of gender roles are described; these include: to support feminist claims, to compare media with real life, to predict effects on audiences, and to detect effects of media producers on content. Third, previous content analyses published in Sex Roles and other gender-focused journals are reviewed and categorized in terms of medium, genre, time span, gender, and nationality. Finally, contributions of each of the articles in this special issue are outlined

Who regulates food? Australians' perceptions of responsibility for food safety

Food scares have diminished trust in public institutions to guarantee food safety. Food governance after the food scare era is concerned with institutional independence and transparency leading to a hybrid of public and private sector management and to mechanisms for consumer involvement in food governance. This paper explores Australian consumers’ perceptions of who is, and should be responsible for food safety. Forty-seven participants were interviewed as part of a larger study on trust in the food system. Participants associate food governance with government, industry, and the individual. While few participants can name the national food regulator, there is a strong belief that the government is responsible for regulating the quality and safety of food. Participants are wary of the role of the food industry in food safety, believing that profit motives will undermine effective food regulation. Personal responsibility for food safety practices was also identified. While there are fewer mechanisms for consumer involvement and transparency built into the food governance system, Australian consumers display considerable trust in government to protect food safety. There is little evidence of the politicisation of food, reflecting a level of trust in the Australian food governance system that may arise from a lack of exposure to major food scares.Julie Henderson, John Coveney and Paul War

Reconnecting Australian consumers and producers: Identifying problems of distrust

A growing gap between the production and consumption of food has led to a decline in consumer trust in food, and a desire for increased regulation of food. The aim of this study was to investigate the nature of consumer trust in food production and regulation in the wake of shifts in food technology, globalisation and production. Semi-structured interviews (n= 47) were conducted in 2009 with participants living in rural and metropolitan South Australia. Rural participants were more trusting of food production because of their direct experience with producing food than their metropolitan counterparts. Consumers' embeddedness in food production impacts their trust in food. Increasing local food production and consumption may increase consumer trust in food, and decrease consumer dependence on government regulation. © 2012 Elsevier Ltd.Samantha B. Meyer, John Coveney, Julie Henderson, Paul R. Ward, Anne W. Taylo

Trust makers, breakers and brokers: Building trust in the Australian food system

Background: The importance of consumer trust in the food supply has previously been identified, and dimensions of consumer trust in food - who they trust and the type of trust that they exhibit - has been explored. However, there is a lack of research about the mechanisms through which consumer trust in the food supply is developed, maintained, broken and repaired. This study seeks to address this gap by exploring if, and how, consumer trust in the food supply is considered by the media, food industry and governments when responding to food scares. The aim of the research is to develop models of trust building that can be implemented following food scares. Methods. Semi-structured interviews will be undertaken with media, public relations officials and policy makers in Australia, New Zealand and the United Kingdom. Participants will be recruited through purposive sampling and will be asked to discuss a hypothetical case study outlining a food incident, and any experiences of specific food scares. Models of trust development, maintenance and repair will be developed from interview data. Comment on these models will be sought from experts in food-related organizations through a Delphi study, where participants will be asked to consider the usefulness of the models. Participants' comments will be used to revise the models until consensus is reached on the suitability and usability of the models. Discussion. This study will contribute to the literature about systems-based trust, and explore trust as a social and regulatory process. The protocol and results will be of interest and use to the food industry, food regulators, consumer advocate groups, media seeking to report food-related issues and policy makers concerned with public health and consumer health and well-being. This research represents an important contribution to the translation of the theoretical conceptualizations of trust into practical use in the context of food

A qualitative study of patient (dis)trust in public and private hospitals: the importance of choice and pragmatic acceptance for trust considerations in South Australia

Background This paper explores the nature and reasoning for (dis)trust in Australian public and private hospitals. Patient trust increases uptake of, engagement with and optimal outcomes from healthcare services and is therefore central to health practice, policy and planning. Methods A qualitative study in South Australia, including 36 in-depth interviews (18 from public and 18 from private hospitals). Results ‘Private patients’ made active choices about both their hospital and doctor, playing the role of the ‘consumer’, where trust and choice went hand in hand. The reputation of the doctor and hospital were key drivers of trust, under the assumption that a better reputation equates with higher quality care. However, making a choice to trust a doctor led to personal responsibility and the additional requirement for self-trust. ‘Public patients’ described having no choice in their hospital or doctor. They recognised ‘problems’ in the public healthcare system but accepted and even excused these as ‘part of the system’. In order to justify their trust, they argued that doctors in public hospitals tried to do their best in difficult circumstances, thereby deserving of trust. This ‘resigned trust’ may stem from a lack of alternatives for free health care and thus a dependence on the system. Conclusion These two contrasting models of trust within the same locality point to the way different configurations of healthcare systems, hospital experiences, insurance coverage and related forms of ‘choice’ combine to shape different formats of trust, as patients act to manage their vulnerability within these contexts