Table 2. Acceptability of and Intention to Use Internet Grocery Service (IGS) Among Caregivers Residing in an Urban Food Desert (N = 34), Chicago, 2011-2012.
| Factor | Value |
|---|---|
| Acceptabilitya | Mean (SD) |
| Convenience of home food delivery | 3.6 (0.8) |
| Satisfaction with IGS prices | 2.6 (1.0) |
| Satisfaction with quality of foods | 3.5 (0.6) |
| Satisfaction with variety of foods offered | 3.4 (0.8) |
| Web site ease of use | 3.5 (1.0) |
| Intention to use IGS in the future (n = 33) | n (%) |
| Never | 3 (9.1) |
| 1–6 times per year | 18 (54.5) |
| 7–11 times per year | 3 (9.1) |
| 1 time per month | 6 (18.2) |
| 2 times per month | 2 (6.1) |
| 3 times per month | 1 (3.0) |
| Every week, or every time I buy groceries | 0 |
| Factors that would strongly influence future use of IGS (n = 34)b | n (%) |
| Accepting Supplemental Food Assistance Program vouchers as payment | 15 (44.1) |
| Prices equal to or lower than supermarkets | 27 (79.4) |
| Able to shop using computers in public locations | 5 (14.7) |
| Able to shop using a computer at home | 15 (44.1) |
| Foods delivered within 3 days of ordering | 2 (5.9) |
| Foods delivered within 2 days of ordering | 5 (14.7) |
| Foods delivered within 1 day of ordering | 19 (55.9) |
a
Scored on a 5-point scale: 1, very inconvenient/difficult/unsatisfied; 2, inconvenient/difficult/unsatisfied; 3, neither convenient nor inconvenient/easy nor difficult/satisfied nor dissatisfied; 4, convenient/easy/satisfied; 5, very convenient/easy/satisfied.
b
Answered in a yes/no format, with number and percentage responding yes reported.