Food Handling Practices and Food Safety Messaging Preferences of African-American and Latino Consumers
Extensive research on consumer food handling has identified common practices that could negatively impact food safety. Limited research has considered if food handling practices differ among diverse groups or if unique approaches are needed to provide food safety education for different audiences. T...
Saved in:
Published in | Journal of human sciences and extension Vol. 6; no. 1; pp. 1 - 17 |
---|---|
Main Authors | , , |
Format | Journal Article |
Language | English |
Published |
Mississippi State
Mississippi State University, School of Human Sciences
01.02.2018
Mississippi State University |
Subjects | |
Online Access | Get full text |
Cover
Loading…
Summary: | Extensive research on consumer food handling has identified common practices that could negatively impact food safety. Limited research has considered if food handling practices differ among diverse groups or if unique approaches are needed to provide food safety education for different audiences. This study examined food handling practice differences between African-American and Latino consumers and differing responses to food safety messages. Four focus groups were conducted, two with African-American participants and two with Latino participants, with each focus group consisting of 10-15 participants. Focus group transcripts were reviewed, coded, and grouped into themes using an iterative process. The 50 participants self-identified as either African-American or Latino, had home meal preparation experience, and were 18 years or older. Each focus group was multigenerational and included males and females. Risky food handling practices reported by both groups included rinsing poultry before cooking and limited food thermometer use. African-American participants preferred informational food safety messages, whereas Latino participants were split in preferring informational, guilt-inducing, and fear-inducing messages. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 2325-5226 2325-5226 |
DOI: | 10.54718/FGHK3656 |