Predicting consumption of the USDA protein sub-recommendations among adults: a reasoned action approach

Background: There is reportedly an under-consumption of protein foods from sub-recommendations within the Dietary Guidelines for Americans (meat, poultry, and eggs, seafood, and nuts, seeds and soy-products). The purpose of this study was to operationalise the Reasoned Action Approach (RAA) to better understand the theory-based factors associated with the consumption of all three protein sub-recommendations. Methods: A national sample of adults in the United States of America (n=372) were recruited. Protein was evaluated using a modified version of a previously validated survey. RAA variables (intentions, instrumental and experiential attitudes, injunctive and descriptive norms, autonomy, and capacity) were measured for each protein sub-recommendation. Linear regression analyses were used to evaluate determinants of intentions and consumption of protein from each sub-recommendation. Results: Adults predispositions were significantly higher (P’s<0.05) for consuming meats, poultry and eggs [intentions (1.43), instrumental (1.51) and experiential (1.49) attitudes, injunctive (1.23) and descriptive (1.14) norms, autonomy (2.16), and capacity (2.07)], compared to the other groups [seafood (intentions (-0.24), instrumental (0.37) and experiential (0.63) attitudes, injunctive (0.17) and descriptive (-0.46) norms, autonomy (1.73), and capacity (0.94)); nuts, seeds, and soy products (intentions (0.57), instrumental (0.76) and experiential (0.85) attitudes, injunctive (0.47) and descriptive (-0.01) norms, autonomy (1.91), and capacity (1.62))]. A significant amount of the variance was explained for each protein sub-recommendation using the RAA variables[meats, poultry and eggs (intentions adjusted R2=0.596/ behaviour adjusted R2=0.166); seafood (intentions adjusted R2=0.691/ behaviour adjusted R2=0.363); nuts, seeds and soy-products (intentions adjusted R2=0.582/ behaviour adjusted R2=0.390)]; however not all variables were significant. Conclusions: The RAA appears to be a robust model for explaining why adults under consume protein foods from the USDA sub-recommendations. Future public health education interventions should give particular attention to seafood’s and nuts, seeds, and soy products affordability while maintaining palatability.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Health Promotion Perspectives
Published
2025-12-30
DOI
https://doi.org/10.34172/hpp.025.44443
Primary Topic
Consumer Attitudes and Food Labeling
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Predicting consumption of the USDA protein sub-recommendations among adults: a reasoned action approach

Karly S. Geller, Paul Branscum
Health Promotion Perspectives
Consumer Attitudes and Food Labeling
article

Predicting consumption of the USDA protein sub-recommendations among adults: a reasoned action approach

Karly S. Geller, Paul Branscum
article en

Abstract

Background: There is reportedly an under-consumption of protein foods from sub-recommendations within the Dietary Guidelines for Americans (meat, poultry, and eggs, seafood, and nuts, seeds and soy-products). The purpose of this study was to operationalise the Reasoned Action Approach (RAA) to better understand the theory-based factors associated with the consumption of all three protein sub-recommendations. Methods: A national sample of adults in the United States of America (n=372) were recruited. Protein was evaluated using a modified version of a previously validated survey. RAA variables (intentions, instrumental and experiential attitudes, injunctive and descriptive norms, autonomy, and capacity) were measured for each protein sub-recommendation. Linear regression analyses were used to evaluate determinants of intentions and consumption of protein from each sub-recommendation. Results: Adults predispositions were significantly higher (P’s<0.05) for consuming meats, poultry and eggs [intentions (1.43), instrumental (1.51) and experiential (1.49) attitudes, injunctive (1.23) and descriptive (1.14) norms, autonomy (2.16), and capacity (2.07)], compared to the other groups [seafood (intentions (-0.24), instrumental (0.37) and experiential (0.63) attitudes, injunctive (0.17) and descriptive (-0.46) norms, autonomy (1.73), and capacity (0.94)); nuts, seeds, and soy products (intentions (0.57), instrumental (0.76) and experiential (0.85) attitudes, injunctive (0.47) and descriptive (-0.01) norms, autonomy (1.91), and capacity (1.62))]. A significant amount of the variance was explained for each protein sub-recommendation using the RAA variables[meats, poultry and eggs (intentions adjusted R2=0.596/ behaviour adjusted R2=0.166); seafood (intentions adjusted R2=0.691/ behaviour adjusted R2=0.363); nuts, seeds and soy-products (intentions adjusted R2=0.582/ behaviour adjusted R2=0.390)]; however not all variables were significant. Conclusions: The RAA appears to be a robust model for explaining why adults under consume protein foods from the USDA sub-recommendations. Future public health education interventions should give particular attention to seafood’s and nuts, seeds, and soy products affordability while maintaining palatability.

Health Promotion PerspectivesVol. 15(4)
Miami University (US)
Life below water
Openalex Percentile: Top 22%
Consumer Attitudes and Food Labeling
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.