(PO13-19-22) Effect of Source on Perceptions of Pulse Nutrition Information

The ePoster content is available to NUTRITION 2022 LIVE ONLINE attendees who are logged in.<br><br>If you are registered, log in and then come back here to use this button.

Presenting Author(s)

AN

Alese M. Nelson, PhD
– Postdoctoral Resesarch Associate, USDA/ARS Grand Forks Human Nutrition Research Center, Grand Forks, North Dakota, United States

Co-Author(s)

JR

James N. Roemmich, Ph.D.
– Research Physiologist/ Center Director, USDA/ARS Grand Forks Human Nutrition Research Center, Grand Forks, North Dakota, United States

Disclosure(s):

Alese M. Nelson, PhD: No relevant financial relationship(s) with ineligible companies to disclose.

Objectives: Despite the availability of empirically supported dietary guidelines, Americans largely have nutritionally inadequate diets; few eat enough pulses, which meet dietary requirements for both vegetables and protein (Dietary Guidelines for Americans 2020-2025, 2020). The purpose of the present study was to determine how information source (control, USDA, hospital, or social media) impacts perceptions of diet information. We hypothesized that non-government diet information sources (hospital, social media) would be perceived as more trustworthy and more likely to be followed.

Methods: Participants (N = 537) completed a survey in which they viewed a flyer containing information about consuming pulses. There were 4 conditions in which the purported source of the information was manipulated: control (no source), USDA, a fictitious hospital, and a fictitious social media user. Participants answered questions regarding their perceptions of the flyer’s accuracy, how trustworthy and reliable the source was, their interest in learning more from the source, and their likelihood of following the flyer advice. Participants also indicated their attitudes, perceived control, and perceived norms regarding eating pulses to assess the primary components of the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB; Ajzen, 2013). Finally, participants rated their top 3 most trusted sources for health information from a list of 27 sources.

Results: Results of ANOVA indicated that the USDA and hospital sources were rated as more accurate, trustworthy, reliable, and more desirable to learn more from relative to the control and social media conditions (ps < .001). There were no differences in likelihood of following advice depending on source. To further examine what did predict likelihood of following advice, multiple regression was used to study measures of TPB. Results showed that more positive attitudes, greater perceived control and normalcy, and past behavior were predictors. Doctors, scientists, and family/friends were the most frequently occurring “most trusted” sources.

Conclusions: While trust in nutrition advice from government and medical institutions is greater than in social media, trust in source may not impact which dietary recommendations people follow.

Funding Sources: Funded by USDA-ARS #3062-51000-057-00D