A Qualitative consumer study related to food-type dietary supplement labelling
Methodology
3 Methodology | 4 Study limitations and notes
Methodology
The research utilised a qualitative methodology consisting of ten 1.5 hour focus group discussions with participants. The allocation of groups was skewed towards New Zealand, given the greater prevalence of FTDS and therefore potentially higher consumer awareness and use. Groups were therefore allocated as follows:
- Four groups in Australia;
- Six groups in New Zealand.
3.1 Group Structure
In order to fully explore the issues in relation to FTDS, the research was conducted primarily with people who claim to use FTDS in some way, or who are potentially likely to use FTDS because of their interest in the healthiness of the foods they buy, or interest in choosing foods for a healthy diet.
Previous research conducted by NFO Donovan Research identified that the following groups are more likely than other groups to use nutrition content claims:
- People aged 35-64 years;
- Females;People who are highly health conscious;
- People with special health needs.
In order to enhance group synergy, groups were also structured to include the same socio economic status. The groups were therefore structured as follows:
Australian Component
Health consciousness Level | AGE GROUP | SES | ||
18-24 | 25-44 | 45-64 | . | |
1 - Special health needs | X | 1 group | 1 group | High |
2 - Highly health conscious consumers | X | 1 group | X | Low |
3 - Moderately health conscious consumers | X | X | 1 group | Low |
New Zealand Component:
Health consciousness Level | AGE GROUP | SES | ||
18-24 | 25-44 | 45-64 | . | |
1 - Special health needs | 1 group | 1 group | X | High |
2 - Highly/moderately health conscious | 1 group | 1 group | 1 group | Low |
3 - Less concerned about health | X | 1 group | X | High |
The recruitment screening questionnaire (Appendix A) demonstrates how each level of health consciousness was defined for this study.
Participants were recruited on the basis that they were the ‘main (or equal) household food shopper’. Most groups included a minimum of two males.
3.2 Research Locations
Groups were held in three states/ territories in Australia and in the North Island of New Zealand. The groups were held in a mix of metro and regional locations, as specified below:
Australia | . | New Zealand | . |
Sydney | 1 group | Auckland | 2 groups |
Canberra (pilot) | 1 group | Wellington | 2 groups |
Perth | 2 groups | Palmerston North | 2 groups |
Total |
4 groups | . |
6 groups |
One group was used to pilot the discussion guide and group procedure. This group was held in Canberra. An additional group to those mentioned above was conducted in Wellington after one of the two groups allocated to this location was poorly attended (5 participants).
3.3 Recruitment
To ensure quality recruitment services and compliance with privacy legislation, all participants were recruited using IQCA accredited recruitment companies. Companies used were J&S Research (NSW and ACT), Surveys Australia (WA) and NFO New Zealand.
Potential participants were selected on the basis of their responses to a screening questionnaire that ensured their legitimate eligibility based on the group structure outlined above. Eighty-three people participated in the focus groups.
Metropolitan groups were held in focus group facilities whereas non-metropolitan groups were held in a central location to participants (ie hotel function room, community centre).
Australian participants were offered AU$50 for their time and New Zealand participants were offered NZ$40. Incentives were paid at current rates for consumer groups in each country.
3.4 Discussion Guides and Group Procedure
The Discussion Guide was developed by NFO Donovan Research in consultation with FSANZ, taking into account the issues that had been identified in the project brief and subsequent meetings.
All sessions were conducted in a structured way in order to cover the breadth of issues and varieties of FTDS, and to increase engagement with the issues. A copy of the discussion guide can be found in Appendix A.
To enable participants to distinguish between FTDS products and other products that are not FTDS, five pairs of food and drink products were used as examples. Each pair included a FTDS product (labelled with the prescribed term ‘dietary supplement’), together with a ‘regular’ counterpart food. Product categories included:
- flavoured water;
- fruit juice (orange or black currant)
- breakfast cereal;
- yogurt; and
- confectionary/lollypops.
As well, the moderator referred to hand-held showcards, which displayed the various terms and statements introduced during the discussion (Appendix B).
4 Study limitations and notes
- References to ‘participants’ refer to consumer participants in this study. Although the study involved a reasonably large number of participants for qualitative research (n=83), care must be taken when extrapolating the results to the general population. This is because participants recruited to qualitative research are drawn from large group participant databases, rather than being randomly drawn from the total population of Australian and New Zealand households. The sample is also skewed to include more people who are health conscious or who have special health needs compared to those less concerned about health.
- A mix of metropolitan and regional locations was included in order to capture the broad spectrum of views and experiences, which may be influenced by geographic location, rather than to draw comparisons between locations. Obvious differences between Australia and New Zealand participants are reported where they were apparent; however the results are mostly amalgamated.
- Following accepted best practice for reporting qualitative research, this report:
- Focuses on views, opinions and experiences that were fairly consistent across the groups; and
- Does not document isolated, or 'one off' comments, which have the potential to be misleading, and can distort the overall conclusions. In the few instances where reporting an isolated comment is deemed appropriate, it is clearly identified as a peripheral view, and not representative of 'mainstream' opinion / experience.
- Focuses on views, opinions and experiences that were fairly consistent across the groups; and
- The term nutrition content claims is used to denote nutrition content claims for the purpose of this report. Function claims were not included in discussions.
- The number of groups (ten) conducted was driven largely by budgetary constraints. It is the researchers’ view that this number of groups was sufficient to ascertain with confidence the majority of consistent findings, which were uncovered in early groups and were confirmed in latter groups without any new viewpoints emerging. Thus, findings reported as ‘majority’ viewpoints would be unlikely to change if further groups were conducted. However, the researchers are less confident that the full spectrum of minority viewpoints have been captured, and some of these opinions could well be more dominant than these results suggest. Conducting additional groups would have provided additional data from which differences between types of consumers (different attitudes, interests and behaviour with regards to supplements and healthy foods) could have been more confidently analysed. As well the number of groups has been insufficient to comment on geographical differences (but selected to over-represent NZ due to longer experience with FTDS)
Home | top | Detailed findings Part A | Part B | Appendixes