Inclination to Use Fish Relying on the Evaluation of its Usefulness: A Case of Cities in Khorasan Razavi, Southern, and Northern Khorasan

علوم اجتماعی دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد

Article 10, Volume 13, Issue 1 - Serial Number 27, September 2016, Pages 239-260   

Document Type: علمی - پژوهشی

DOI: 10.22067/jss.v13i1.20204

Authors

Ali Yousefi^* ; Mohammad Ghorbani; Somayeh Varshoy

Ferdowsi University of Mashhad

Abstract

Extended Abstract
1. Introduction
Under the condition that aquatics plays an important role in supplying the animal protein and in contrast to protein resources, aquatics has higher food value. The amount of aquatics and fishery consumption is very low in contrast to other kinds of meat among Iranian families. The article attempts to investigate fish consumption among the city dwellers in three the provinces of Iran, including Khorasan Razavi, Southern, and Northern Khorasan. The main question of this study deals with the evaluation of the relative advantage of fish consumption and also the factors that are important in the advantages of fish consumption.
2. Theoretical framework
The Programmed Behavior Theory is one of the most complete patterns in behavior prediction in comparison to other behavioral theories, and it is also an important model in food selection. Ayzen (2002) believes that this theory is one of the influential theories in determining consumption behavior and the interaction among human beings. The Programmed Behavior Theory is based on intellectual interaction hypothesis. According to this theory, it is enough to identify intellectual elements to determine interaction. According to Conscious Will Theory, the main criterion for comparing the advantages and disadvantages of actions is their usefulness. One of the determining factors in each behavior is the intention to do the behavior. These beliefs are categorized in 3 aspects; behavioral, orthodox, and control beliefs. In addition to this theory, The Theory of Transfer is used. Therefore, social behavior is a kind of reinforcing or damaging reward. Therefore, basic social behaviour can be determined according to reward or damage. Inspiring and damaging rewards can act as hindering behavior.
3. Methodology
The population of the study includes city residents in the three provinces of Khorasan in 1390 that were selected based on categorized two-level and random sampling. Overall, 1229 families were selected and the house wife in each family was interviewed based on the same questionnaire.
4. Results
The evaluation of the highest relative benefit was carried out based on criteria such as interest, economical issues, and the preparation with chicken meat. The highest benefit in terms of the health of meat belongs to fish meat. The highest benefit concerning the nutritional varieties and taste in relation to red meat. In addition, the highest perceived benefit in terms of the criteria for the ease of maintenance belongs to plant foods as an alternative for meat. The priorities of families for consumption are chicken meat, mutton, and the food that is substituted for mutton and fish respectively.
The results of covariance analysis also show that the simultaneous impact of influential factors on the evaluation of fish benefits on the amount of the evaluation of fish consumption benefits is quite significant (.000). 63.6 percent of the variances in evaluation of fish consumption benefits in all three Provinces of Khorasan Razavi, Northern and Southern Khorasan are explained by the variables included in the model and the hybrid forms (interactive). Individual impact of five variables as the evaluation of chicken consumption benefit, evaluation of meat substitute benefit, evaluation of the red meat consumption benefit, pressure of norms and social rewards to evaluate the benefit of fish consumption is quite significant. Moreover, the combined effect of the evaluation of fish consumption benefit, evaluation of meat substitute consumption benefit, evaluation of red meat consumption benefit to the assessment of fish consumption is significant.
5. Discussion and Conclusion
Despite the many advantages, the evaluation of fish consumption benefits on factors such as interest, economical issues, safety, easy preparation and cooking, cooking variety, ease of maintenance and taste, is low in comparison with other types of meat. So, the evaluation of fish consumption benefit is placed after other kinds of meats and meat substitute foods. On the other hand, among the criteria mentioned, only the highest evaluation in terms of health benefits is related to fish meat. On the other hand, the lowest average consumption of fish is related to food diversity priority. Among the most important variables that affect the evaluation of fish consumption benefits are the fish-substitute foods (meat and vegetable dishes) that influence the assessment of fish consumption benefits.
The assessment of meat and vegetables benefits that substitute fish are presented as control factors that are a yardstick for the comprehension of fish consumption control. That is, the factors that affect individuals’ behavior in that in similar conditions that person will make the most rational decision. In other words, according to the Conscious Will Theory, when the consumer is considered as a wise person, in a determined information framework, selects a kind of food that substitute fish and other kinds of meat or vegetable foods. Likewise, as in the influential factors affecting fish benefits, the greatest prediction index is related to the assessment of red meat consumption benefits that has a negative influence on the evaluation of fish consumption benefits. This means that by selecting the red meat as a food that has the most mental benefit, the evaluation of fish benefit is reduced. The evaluation of meat substitute and chicken meat benefits has the highest predictability index on the evaluation of fish consumption benefits. A person that selects chicken meat and meat substitute food that fitted the most benefit according to the desired criteria can control his/her behaviour to consumption and the avoidance of fish consumption and buying intention.
In explaining the obtained results, it can be said that, the provinces of Khorasan, have rational interaction to consciousness and intellectual calculation in a way that in fish consumption, the best practices for using fish is chosen. This is also in accordance with Rational Choice Theory, on the basis of its benefits. Advantage by itself is related to a variance of advantage and the value of each advantage is determined by the subject. The results of the study showed that the individual impact factor of mental norms variables of fish consumption (orthodox pressure and social reward) has also a significant impact on the assessment of fish consumption benefits.

Keywords

Evaluation of benefit; Fish consumption; orthodox strain; social reward consumption

References

1. رفیع پور، ف. (1379). سنجش گرایش روستاییان نسبت به جهاد سازندگی. تهران: مرکز تحقیقات و بررسی مسائل روستایی جهاد سازندگی.

2. ریتزر، ج. (1374). نظریه‌های جامعه‌شناسی. (م. ثلاثی، مترجم). تهران: انتشارات فرهنگ معاصر.

3. صالحی، ح. (1383). اقدامات و سیاست‌های شیلات در جهت افزایش سهم آبزیان در سبد مصرف خانوار. (9-1). هشتمین کنگرۀ تغذیه ایران. انجمن نغذیه ایران. تهران، ایران.

4. لیتل، د. (1373). تبیین در علوم اجتماعی، درآمدی به فلسفه علوم اجتماعی. (ک. سروش، مترجم). تهران: نشر صراط.

5. نوری زمان‌آبادی، ن. (1375). بررسی عوامل مؤثر بر رفتار مصرف‌کنندگان محصولات دریایی. مجموعه مقالات ششمین کنفرانس شیلات ایران. تهران: دانشگاه تربیت مدرس.

6. یوسفی، ع. (1383). بررسی مصرف آبزیان و فرآورده‌های شیلاتی در شهر مشهد. مشهد: ادارۀ شیلات استان خراسان.

7. یوسفی، ع. و شریعتی، م. ت. (1388). تحلیل جامعه‌شناختی رفتار مصرف ماهی در شهر مشهد. مجلّۀ مطالعات اجتماعی ایران، 3 (3)، پیاپی 7، 37-5.

8. یوسفی، ع، قربانی، ع. (1390). بررسی رفتار مصرف، تولید و توزیع آبزیان در استان‌های خراسان رضوی، شمالی و جنوبی، مشهد: سازمان شیلات خراسان.

9. Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Process, 50(2), 179-211.

10. Ajzen, I. (2002). Constructing a TPB questionnaire: Conceptual and methodological considerations. Retrieved from http: // www.uni-bielefeld.de/ ikg/ zick/ ajzen%20construction% 20a% 20t pb%20questionnaire.pdf.

11. Anderson, I., & Gaile-Sarkane, E. (2008). Influence of factors on consumer behavior. 5th International Scientific Conference on Business and Management, Vilnius, Lithuania

12. Birch, D., & Lawley, M. (2010). A conceptual framework for investigating fish consumption in Australia. ANZMAC 2010 Conference, Christchurch, New Zealand 29 November - 1 December 2010, Australian and New Zealand Marketing Academy.

13. Cahu, C., Salen, P., & de Lorgeril, M. (2004). Farmed and wild fish in the prevention of cardiovascular diseases: Assessing the possible differences in lipid nutritional values. Nutr Metab Cardiovas, 14, 34–41.

14. Conner, M., & Armitage, Ch. J. (1998). Extending the theory of planned behavior: A review and avenues for further research. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 28(15), 1429-1464.

15. Cross, R.M. (2005). Exploring attitudes: The case for Q methodology.Health Educational Research: Theory & Practice, 20(2), 206-213.

16. Gofton, L.E.R. (1995). Dollar rich and time poor? Some problems in interpreting changing food habits. British Food Journal, 97(10), 11.

17. Honkanen, P., Verplanken, B., & Olsen, S. O. (2006) Ethical values and motives driving organic food choice. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 5, 420–430.

18. Jalal Ahamed, A.F.M. (2009). Consumer’s attitude and consumption of fish in Dhaka city: Influence of perceived risk, trust and knowledge (Unpublished Master's thesis). The Norwegian College of Fishery ScienceUniversity of Tromso, Norway & Nha Trang University, Vietnam.

19. Leek, S., Maddock, S., & Foxall, G. (2000). Situational determinants of fish consumption. British Food Journal, 102(1), 18.

20. Michael, W. A. (2005). Social structure, status seeking and the basic food groups. ANZMAC 2005 conference. Retrieved from http://www. onf.uwa.edu.au.

21. Olsen, S. O. (2001). Consumer involvement in seafood as family meals in Norway: An application of the expectancy-value approach. Appetite, 36(2), 173-186.

22. Olsen, S. O. (2004). Antecedents of seafood consumption behavior: An overview. Journal of Aquatic Food Product Technology, 13(3), 79-91.

23. Olsen, S., Ottar Heide, M., Calvo Dopico, D., & Toftenb, K. (2008). Explaining intention to consume a new fish product: A cross-generational and cross-cultural comparison. Food Quality and Preference, 19(7), 618-627.

24. Olson, S. O (2003). Understanding the relationship between age and seafood consumption: The mediating role of attitude, health involvement and convenience. Food Quality and Preference, 14(2003), 199–209.

25. Ouellette, J. A., & Wood, W. (1998). Habit and intention in everyday life: The multiple processes by which past behavior predicts future behavior. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 54–74.

26. Pieniak, Z., Verbeke, W., Scholderer, J., Brunsø, K., & Olsen, S.O. (2007). European consumers’ use of and trust in information sources about fish. .Food Quality and Preference, 18(8), 1050-1063.

27. Rajani, N. (2010). Values, attitudes and intention to consume wild fish versus farmed fish in Nha Trang (Unpublished master's thesis). The Norwegian College of Fishery Science University of Tromso, Norway & Nha Trang University, Vietnam.

28. Rortveit, A.W., Olsen, S.O. (2009). Combining the role of convenience and consideration set size in explaining fish consumption in Norway. Appetite, 52(2), 313-317.

29. Saba, A., & Messina, F. (2003). Attitudes towards organic foods and risk/benefit perception associated with pesticides. Food Quality and Preference, 14, 637–645.

30. Saba, A., & Vassallo, M. (2002). Consumer attitudes toward the use of gene technology in tomato production. Food Quality and Preference, 13(1), 13.

31. Sparks, P., Hedderly, D., & Shepherd, R. (1992). An investigation into the relationship between perceived control, attitude variability and the consumption of two common foods. .European Journal of Social Psychology, 22(1), 55-71.

32. Thom, N. T. (2007). Attitude, motivation, and consumption of seafood in Bacninh province, Vietnam (Master's thesis, Norwegian College of Fisheries Science University of Tromsø, Norway). Retrieved from http://munin.uit.no/bitstream/handle/10037/1001/thesis.pdf?sequence=3&isAllowed=y.

33. Trondsen, T., Braaten, T., Lund, E., & Eggen, A.E. (2004). Health and seafood consumption patterns among women aged 45-69 years: A Norwegian seafood consumption study. Food Quality and Preference, 15(2), 117-128.

34. Trondsen, T., Braaten, T., Lund, E., & Eggen, A.E. (2004). Health and seafood consumption patterns among women aged 45-69 years: A Norwegian seafood consumption study. Food Quality and Preference, 15(2), 117-128.

35. Verbeke, W., & Vackier, I. (2005). Individual determinants of fish consumption: Application of the theory of planned behaviour. Appetite, 44(1), 67-82.

36. Verbeke, W., Sioen, I., Pieniak, Z., Van Camp, J., & De Henauw, S. (2004). Consumer perception versus scientific evidence about health benefits and safety risks from fish consumption. Public Health Nutrition, 8(4), 422–429.

37. Yudkin, J. (1956). Man's choice of food. The Lancet, 267(6924), 645-649.