Journal List > J Nutr Health > v.51(6) > 1111490

J Nutr Health. 2018 Dec;51(6):590-598. Korean.
Published online Dec 31, 2018.
© 2018 The Korean Nutrition Society
Comparison of food involvement scale (FIS) and use intention for block type sauce between US and Japanese consumers
Hojin Lee,1 Su Jin Kim,2 and Min A Lee2
1Industry-Academic Cooperation Foundation, Kookmin University, Seoul 02707, Korea.
2Department of Food and Nutrition, Kookmin University, Seoul 02707, Korea.

To whom correspondence should be addressed. tel: +82-2-910-5745, Email:
Received Nov 14, 2018; Revised Dec 01, 2018; Accepted Dec 11, 2018.

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License ( which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.



This study was conducted to compare the food involvement scale (FIS) of American and Japanese consumers. In addition, the effects of familiarity, likability, and expectations on willingness to use intentions for block type sauce by nationality were evaluated.


A total of 149 and 112 American and Japanese consumers, respectively, completed the survey. Consumers were asked about familiarity, likability, expectation, willing to use intention, and usage frequency of block type sauce, food involvement scale (FIS), and demographic information.


There were differences in the using frequency of block type sauce according to nationality, with consumers in Japan showing significantly higher frequency of using block type sauce than those in the United States (US) (p < 0.001). According to the FIS, US consumers were more focused on how to provide food than food, such as cooking process, table setting, and food shopping, compared to Japanese consumers. In addition, ‘expectation’ and ‘likability’ among US consumers and ‘expectation’ and ‘familiarity’ among Japanese consumers were positive attributes for willing to use intention (p < 0.01).


In the case of the US consumers, ‘familiarity’ was not significant because the using frequency of the block type sauce was lower than that of Japanese consumers. In the case of the Japanese consumers, ‘likability’ was not significant because they enjoy cooking itself according to the FIS. Therefore, it is necessary to recognize positive attributes as a key factor for block type sauce, as well as to search for ways to apply marketing strategies based on attributes by nationality.

Keywords: block type sauce; food involvement scale; use intentions


Table 1
Demographic description in groups by nationality
Click for larger image

Table 2
Differences of food involvement scale (FIS) by nationality
Click for larger image

Table 3
Using frequency of block type sauce by nationality
Click for larger image

Table 4
Differences of internal factors (familiarity, likability), external factor (expectation) and willing to use intention for block type sauce by nationality
Click for larger image

Table 5
Differences of the effect of willing to use intention on internal (familiarity, likability) and external (expectation) factors for block type sauce by nationality
Click for larger image


This research was supported by Korea Institute of Planning and Evaluation for Technology in Food, Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (IPET) through High Value-added Food Technology Development Program, funded by Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs (MAFRA) (Grant number: 316072-03).

1. Beharrell B, Denison TJ. Involvement in a routine food shopping context. Br Food J 1995;97(4):24–29.
2. Zaichkowsky JL. Measuring the involvement construct. J Consum Res 1985;12(3):341–352.
3. Bell R, Marshall DW. The construct of food involvement in behavioral research: scale development and validation. Appetite 2003;40(3):235–244.
4. Marshall D, Bell R. Relating the food involvement scale to demographic variables, food choice and other constructs. Food Qual Prefer 2004;15(7-8):871–879.
5. Kang JH, Jeong HJ. Measuring the moderating effect of food involvement in the relationship between food choice motives and fruit consumption. Korean J Food Cult 2008;23(4):448–454.
6. Barker M, Lawrence W, Woadden J, Crozier SR, Skinner TC. Women of lower educational attainment have lower food involvement and eat less fruit and vegetables. Appetite 2008;50(2-3):464–468.
7. Korea Trade-Investment Promotion Agency (KOTRA). Global market report - Japan food market trend and export guideline [Internet]. Seoul: KOTRA; 2015 [cited 2018 Oct 22].
8. Korea Agro-Fisheries & Food Trade Corporation. 2017 processed food segment market status: HMR market [Internet]. Naju: Korea Agro-Fisheries & Food Trade Corporation; 2017 [cited 2018 Nov 8].
9. Lee SC, Song KO. Effect of food involvement, HMR selection attributes and repurchase intention - Focused on female consumers. J Tourism Leis Res 2018;30(3):157–175.
10. National Restaurant Association (US). National Restaurant Association releases annual chef predictions on “what's hot” for menu trends in 2018 [Internet]. Washington, D.C: National Restaurant Association; 2017 [cited 2018 Oct 13].
11. Jang SH. Trend and future direction for domestic HMR products. Food Ind Nutr 2017;22(1):13–17.
12. Korea Agro-Fisheries & Food Trade Corporation. 2015 processed food segment market status: sauce and dressing market [Internet]. Naju: Korea Agro-Fisheries & Food Trade Corporation; 2015 [cited 2018 Nov 8].
13. Korea Trade-Investment Promotion Agency (KOTRA). US sauce market trend [Internet]. Seoul: KOTRA; 2014 [cited 2018 Oct 22].
14. Park SR, Choi YO, Youn KS, Kim SD. Preparation and characteristics of kimchi tablet. Korean J Posthaverst Sci Technol 2001;8(3):302–307.
15. Datamonitor (UK). Consumer and innovation trend in sauces, dressings, and condiments. London: Datamonitor; 2012.
16. Steptoe A, Pollard TM, Wardle J. Development of a measure of the motives underlying the selection of food: the food choice questionnaire. Appetite 1995;25(3):267–284.
17. de Barcellos MD, Aguiar LK, Ferreira GC, Vieira LM. Willingness to try innovative food products: as comparison between British and Brazilian consumers. Braz Admin Rev 2009;6(1):50–61.
18. Hoek AC, Luning PA, Weijzen P, Engels W, Kok FJ, de Graaf C. Replacement of meat by meat substitutes. A survey on person- and product-related factors in consumer acceptance. Appetite 2011;56(3):662–673.
19. Fenko A, Backhaus BW, van Hoof JJ. The influence of product-and person-related factors on consumer hedonic responses to soy products. Food Qual Prefer 2015;41:30–40.
20. Pelchat ML, Pliner P. “Try it. You'll like it.” Effects of information on willingness to try novel foods. Appetite 1995;24(2):153–165.
21. Tuorila H, Andersson A, Martikainen A, Salovaara H. Effect of product formula, information and consumer characteristics on the acceptance of a new snack food. Food Qual Prefer 1998;9(5):313–320.
22. Yamada Y, Kawabe T, Ihaya K. Can you eat it? A link between categorization difficulty and food likability. Adv Cogn Psychol 2012;8(3):248–254.
23. Kremer S, Shimojo R, Holthuysen N, Koster EP, Mojet J. Consumer acceptance of salt-reduced “soy sauce” foods over rapidly repeated exposure. Food Qual Prefer 2013;27(2):179–190.
24. Stefani G, Romano D, Cavicchi A. Consumer expectations, liking and willingness to pay for specialty foods: do sensory characteristics tell the whole story? Food Qual Prefer 2006;17(1-2):53–62.
25. Mela DJ. Why do we like what we like? J Sci Food Agric 2001;81(1):10–16.
26. Tan HS, Fischer AR, van Trijp HC, Stieger M. Tasty but nasty? Exploring the role of sensory-liking and food appropriateness in the willingness to eat unusual novel foods like insects. Food Qual Prefer 2016;48:293–302.
27. Euromonitor International (UK). Sauces, dressings and condiments global. London: Euromonitor International; 2018.
28. Euromonitor International (UK). Sauces, dressings and condiments in US. London: Euromonitor International; 2017.
29. Euromonitor International (UK). Sauces, dressings and condiments in Japan. London: Euromonitor International; 2017.
30. Jang HJ, Choi BR, Yi NY, Park BS, Kim HS. Preferences and product development opinions of Koreans and non-Koreans regarding commercialization of Korean foods. Korean J Food Cookery Sci 2010;26(4):458–468.