Table 3.
Multiple regression analyses of acceptability of intervention strategy categories on individual and behavioral characteristics
| Acceptability of strategies promoting healthy eatinga | Acceptability of strategies discouraging unhealthy eatingb | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Individual and behavioral characteristics | B (SE) | β | p | B (SE) | β | p |
| Age | -.05 (.01) | -.12 | <.001 | -.09 (.01) | -.19 | <.001 |
| Gender (0 = boy, 1 = girl) | .17 (.04) | .10 | <.001 | .08 (.04) | .04 | .055 |
| Country: Netherlands vs. UK | .04 (.06) | .02 | .524 | -.01 (.07) | -.00 | .919 |
| Country: Poland vs. UK | .19 (.05) | .11 | .001 | .24 (.06) | .11 | <.001 |
| Country: Portugal vs. UK | .28 (.06) | .13 | <.001 | .40 (.07) | .16 | <.001 |
| Overweight status (0 = not overweight, 1 = overweight) | .10 (.05) | .04 | .054 | .25 (.06) | .09 | <.001 |
| Family affluence: high vs. low | .03 (.06) | .02 | .604 | .09 (.07) | .04 | .192 |
| Family affluence: medium vs. low | .03 (.06) | .02 | .580 | .10 (.07) | .05 | .140 |
| Immigrant status (0 = native, 1 = immigrant) | .22 (.08) | .06 | .008 | .16 (.10) | .04 | .096 |
| Healthy food intake index | .06 (.01) | .16 | <.001 | .05 (.01) | .11 | <.001 |
| Unhealthy food intake index | -.06 (.01) | -.17 | <.001 | -.07 (.01) | -.17 | <.001 |
aR2 = .11, F (11,2029) = 23.70, p < .001; bR2 = .14, F (11,2026) = 29.26, p < .001