Skip to main content
. 2015 Oct 6;19(8):1405–1416. doi: 10.1017/S1368980015002888

Table 4.

Food-related behaviours, attitudinal and psychosocial factors by household food security status among low-income urban African-American families (n 298) in Baltimore City, MD, USA, June 2013–June 2014

Food security status*
Food insecure
Food secure (n 174) Without hunger (n 87) With hunger (n 37)
Mean sd Mean sd Mean sd
Food-related behaviours
Healthier food acquisition 39·26 32·99 37·30 24·20 41·89 29·23
Less-healthy food acquisition 54·10 40·93 54·17 36·93 55·73 41·48
Healthy food preparation 1·39 1·38 1·48 1·62 1·08 1·38
Healthy food beliefs and attitudes
Affordable 10·46 a 2·42 8·90b,c 3·12 7·81 c 3·28
Convenient 10·47a 1·92 9·48 b 1·96 9·68a,b 2·07
Important 12·54 1·74 12·26 1·96 12·41 2·31
Tastes good 4·05 0·84 3·79 0·98 3·70 1·22
Body-image satisfaction 9·20a 2·85 8·33b 2·41 8·57a,b 3·07
Food-related psychosocial factors
Food and nutrition knowledge score 7·14 1·80 6·99 1·76 6·97 1·61
Intentions on healthy eating score 11·71 4·21 10·79 4·01 10·57 4·19
Healthy eating self-efficacy score 24·88 3·70 25·05 3·76 23·89 4·49
a,b,c

Mean values within a row with unlike superscript letters were significantly different (P < 0·05).

*

One-way ANOVA with Bonferroni post hoc test to compare the food security groups.