Food Neophobia and Avoidant/Restrictive Food Intake among Adults and Related Factors

Avoidant/restrictive food intake disorder (ARFID) includes age-inappropriate feeding behaviors in eating patterns, including food neophobia, defined as refusal or reluctance to eat new or unknown foods. This study aimed to assess the prevalence of ARFID and food neophobia among adults and determine the related characteristics of these risks. The study used an anonymous survey questionnaire consisting of three parts as the research tool. The first part of the questionnaire was a metric and concerned socio-demographic data. The Food Neophobia Scale (FNS) and the Nine-Item Avoidance/Restrictive Food Disorder Screen Questionnaire (NIAS) were used to evaluate the eating disorders. The survey included 309 people (60.2% women, 39.8% men) aged 18-77 years. NIAS results indicated that 15.2% of the subjects showed food selectivity, and 11.0% had food anxiety. In the FNS assessment, 42.4% had a low risk of food neophobia, 38.2% a medium risk, and 19.4% a high risk. A higher risk of food neophobia correlated with higher NIAS scores, indicating a higher risk of ARFID (<i>p</i> = 0.00231). The NIAS score increased with the risk of food neophobia (<i>p</i> = 0.000). Respondents at low risk of neophobia were most likely to avoid several products (83.97%), while in the high-risk group, 56.67% did not want to eat a favorite food enriched with a new ingredient. A higher risk of neophobia was correlated with more food avoidance and adverse reactions to new foods (<i>p</i> = 0.000). A higher risk of food neophobia is strongly correlated with a higher risk of ARFID. Although demographics did not significantly impact NIAS results, some trends were noted, such as higher scores among older and underweight people. Those with a higher risk of food neophobia show more food avoidance and a greater reluctance to experiment with new ingredients. Public education should emphasize that eating disorders affect both sexes equally, with tailored interventions for high-risk groups such as the elderly, rural populations, and those with lower education. Health policies should promote access to nutrition education, psychological support, and diverse food options, while further research is needed to improve targeted interventions.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Nutrients
Published
2024-09-02
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/nu16172952
Citations
17
Primary Topic
Sensory Analysis and Statistical Methods
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
5.92
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Food Neophobia and Avoidant/Restrictive Food Intake among Adults and Related Factors

Oskar Kowalski, Şule Aktaç, Wiktoria Staśkiewicz‐Bartecka, Agnieszka Białek-Dratwa et al.
17 citations
Nutrients
Sensory Analysis and Statistical Methods
5.92
article

Food Neophobia and Avoidant/Restrictive Food Intake among Adults and Related Factors

Oskar Kowalski, Şule Aktaç, Wiktoria Staśkiewicz‐Bartecka, Agnieszka Białek-Dratwa, Ayşe Hümeyra İslamoğlu, Güleren Sabuncular, Zehra Margot Çelik, Agata Kiciak, Mateusz Grajek, Aleksandra Wardyniec
article en
17 citations

Abstract

Avoidant/restrictive food intake disorder (ARFID) includes age-inappropriate feeding behaviors in eating patterns, including food neophobia, defined as refusal or reluctance to eat new or unknown foods. This study aimed to assess the prevalence of ARFID and food neophobia among adults and determine the related characteristics of these risks. The study used an anonymous survey questionnaire consisting of three parts as the research tool. The first part of the questionnaire was a metric and concerned socio-demographic data. The Food Neophobia Scale (FNS) and the Nine-Item Avoidance/Restrictive Food Disorder Screen Questionnaire (NIAS) were used to evaluate the eating disorders. The survey included 309 people (60.2% women, 39.8% men) aged 18-77 years. NIAS results indicated that 15.2% of the subjects showed food selectivity, and 11.0% had food anxiety. In the FNS assessment, 42.4% had a low risk of food neophobia, 38.2% a medium risk, and 19.4% a high risk. A higher risk of food neophobia correlated with higher NIAS scores, indicating a higher risk of ARFID (<i>p</i> = 0.00231). The NIAS score increased with the risk of food neophobia (<i>p</i> = 0.000). Respondents at low risk of neophobia were most likely to avoid several products (83.97%), while in the high-risk group, 56.67% did not want to eat a favorite food enriched with a new ingredient. A higher risk of neophobia was correlated with more food avoidance and adverse reactions to new foods (<i>p</i> = 0.000). A higher risk of food neophobia is strongly correlated with a higher risk of ARFID. Although demographics did not significantly impact NIAS results, some trends were noted, such as higher scores among older and underweight people. Those with a higher risk of food neophobia show more food avoidance and a greater reluctance to experiment with new ingredients. Public education should emphasize that eating disorders affect both sexes equally, with tailored interventions for high-risk groups such as the elderly, rural populations, and those with lower education. Health policies should promote access to nutrition education, psychological support, and diverse food options, while further research is needed to improve targeted interventions.

NutrientsVol. 16(17)
Medical University of Silesia (PL), Marmara University (TR), University of Silesia in Katowice (PL)
Zero hunger
Openalex Percentile: Top 4%
Sensory Analysis and Statistical Methods
5.92
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.