Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2014 Jan 1.
Published in final edited form as: J Acad Nutr Diet. 2013 Jan;113(1):127–132. doi: 10.1016/j.jand.2012.08.021

Table 2.

Young adults’ attitudes toward alternative food production practices by socio-demographic characteristics and vegetarian status (Student Health and Wellness Study, n=1,201)a

n Low Importanceb Moderate Importance High Importance P-valuec

% % %
All Students 1,201 51 34 15
Gender
Male 565 54 33 13
Female 630 47 35 18 0.02
Age
Under 21 706 54 34 12
21 to 24 313 50 34 16
25 and older 178 39 34 28 <0.001
Race
White 498 50 35 15
Black 223 46 33 20
Asian 326 54 36 11
Other 154 53 30 17 0.077
Student type
2-year student 598 50 33 17
4-year student 603 51 35 13 0.185
Residence
Lives on-campus 130 46 39 15
Lives in parent/family home 579 54 33 14
Rents/shares rent 413 49 32 19
Owns home 67 39 48 13 0.035
Highest parental educational attainment
College degree or higher 657 48 35 16
Less than college degree 544 53 33 14 0.185
Difficulty living on household income
Low 965 51 35 14
High 223 52 29 19 0.103
Public assistance receipt
No 1,089 50 34 16
Yes 107 56 34 10 0.196
Vegetarian
No 1,115 52 34 14
Yes 69 32 28 41 <0.001
a

Sample sizes vary due missing data.

b

Sum of responses to the importance of food being organically grown, made with organic ingredients, not processed, locally grown, and grown using sustainable agricultural practices between 0–5 was classified as low importance, between 6–10 as moderate importance, and between 11–15 as high importance.

c

P-values from χ2 tests.