The literature has shown that children are constantly affected by influences and factors in various surrounding environments and these impinge on their food perceptions, beliefs, preferences, requests and intake. In certain settings children will be able to manipulate these influences and factors; many times they will not. Children are still very much dependent on the adults and institutions in which they participate for decisions regarding their everyday actions including food consumption. The family and the mother in particular seem to play a multitude of roles.
Families are functioning within the larger environments of the global and local food culture, public health agendas and economy. These different environments influence not only actual food availability, but also rules and procedures regarding presentation of the food and which foods have more value in both a physical and symbolic sense. Certain foods are perceived as having higher value than others, or as more appropriate for certain individuals, times of day, locations or occasions. As children are growing they constantly experience food-related cultural referencing.
Predominant staple foods and strength of the traditional cuisine are bound to shifts in food distribution and marketing, to introduction of new foods on the local market, as well as to family members’ observation and interaction with people and food practices of foreign cultures. Particular population groups may be more likely to embrace new foods, or feel less bound to cultural norms. Perhaps, children may also be categorised amongst these groups. In addition, television food portrayal is considered a key source of exposure to different cuisines, new foods and food-related messages. Food advertising targeting children has been linked to increased purchase requests for advertised foods, unfortunately often of poor nutritional value.
The family has a major role in the variety of foods children are exposed to. This may impact on children’s food perceptions, preferences and eventual consumption. Family lifestyle is likely to influence provision of food in different settings. Family routines and out-of-home commitments may determine which foods are eaten at which times. Family SES may influence amount and variety of foods available; not only in relation to affordability, but also in relation to food restrictions and prescriptions for health reasons. However, eating out at fast food outlets may not be SES-related. In fact, where children are concerned, SES may be more salient when consuming staple foods or when eating in the company of adults,
rather than when consuming so-called ‘children’s foods’ or when eating in the company of peers.
Parents are key players in introducing children to new foods and their own behaviours may influence their children’s neophobia. Simultaneously, perceiving a willingness by their children to try new foods may encourage parents to offer such foods. There exists
controversy, however, on similarity between parents’ and children’s food preferences; with the results tending to indicate that there could be greater similarity between the preferences of siblings. Peers, most probably close friends, also influence children’s food perceptions and food choices, including willingness to try new foods and the perceived physical and social impact of consumption of certain foods.
The literature seems to point to the existence of a children’s food culture where certain food attributes characterise the foods commonly consumed or preferred by children. These attributes are linked mainly to physical properties of the food (e.g. taste, texture), but also to social aspects (e.g. shareability). Children’s likes and dislikes are inextricably linked to this children’s food culture. Of note is that from the child’s perspective, expedience in
preparation, transportation and consumption of food is one determinant of food preferences. The socio-affective context in which foods are presented can also determine development of preferences in young children. The more positive the setting in which a new food is
presented, the more likely the food will be accepted. Although children’s food intake is primarily determined by adult food providers, there are certain situations when children do exercise autonomy in food choice. In-home snack preparation and out-of-home snack choice or purchases are typical of such situations.
Knowledge of food-health links is another potential influence on children’s food perceptions, preferences and behaviours. Children of around 7 years of age seem to be able to
comprehend the basic benefits of consuming healthy foods, as well as the detrimental health value of fats and sugary foods. They can also explain the importance of consuming a variety of foods, although it is unlikely that they are capable of comprehending advanced nutritional concepts. Children seem to find it difficult to distinguish between solid and liquid fats and to correctly categorise certain foods as sweets. There could also be gender
differences in food perceptions and in behavioural intent regarding consumption of particular foods. So much so, a link between consumption of high fat foods and body image has been
identified even in young children. Children’s attitudes regarding certain foods may also differ according to how the food is presented in local retail outlets and how it is marketed.
In the above literature review, it was sometimes difficult to parcel various influences and factors into one ecological level as these influences and factors often transcended levels. The discussion frequently moved back and forth between levels. Yet, this is the nature of an eco-systems approach and it is for this purpose that an ecological model was used to guide this investigation of the influences on and determinants of Maltese children’s food
preferences, choice and intake. The model was used to cut into multiple levels and offer snapshots of the causal chain, rather than to depict the entire causal process. In this regard, my study was also inspired by Furst et al (1996) who recommended a constructivist
approach to food research. This allows for exploration of the ways people engage in the food choice process by incorporating the meanings and understandings that they create in their food choice negotiations, including elicitation of the range and strength of the
influencing factors. According to Kagitcibasi (1988), “The solution of the problem of
complexity is not in simplifying it by artificially imposing upon it a simplistic research design, but rather in grasping and tackling the very complexity.” (p.29)